This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline on thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them at lifeline dot org dot au. A twenty four year old devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationship as a mom, bags packed car, running, her daughters strapped into the backseat.

This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline on thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them at lifeline dot org dot au. A twenty four year old devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationship as a mom, bags packed car, running, her daughters strapped into the backseat.

Mom told me that she needed to go back inside to grab something.

Mom told me that she needed to go back inside to grab something.

Panic.

Panic.

Amy is dead, Sir Amy his dead?

Amy is dead, Sir Amy his dead?

Eight confusion.

Eight confusion.

Well about five minutes they sit n' to suicide.

Well about five minutes they sit n' to suicide.

One hundred percent.

One hundred percent.

This is emersing.

This is emersing.

What do you think is really the honest truth about Amy?

What do you think is really the honest truth about Amy?

The truth about Amy?

The truth about Amy?

SA Episode thirteen.

SA Episode thirteen.

I'm Liam Bartlett.

I'm Liam Bartlett.

And I'm Alison Sandy.

And I'm Alison Sandy.

Let mess you dam Please forgive me for interrupting the cocktail hour. But there are two questions of great importance which I must put to you. First of all, did anybody here throw a bottle into the sea this morning?

Let mess you dam Please forgive me for interrupting the cocktail hour. But there are two questions of great importance which I must put to you. First of all, did anybody here throw a bottle into the sea this morning?

No?

No?

Secondly, did any of you take a bath at twelve fifteen today? An odd time for ablutions? Remarkable a bath which nobody admits having taken, and a bottle which flies by itself.

Secondly, did any of you take a bath at twelve fifteen today? An odd time for ablutions? Remarkable a bath which nobody admits having taken, and a bottle which flies by itself.

You are listening to Peter Eustinov as the famous detective Hercule Pio in the nineteen eighty one classic Agatha Christie movie Evil under the Sun. Here he poses questions which prove critical in him solving the mystery. We'll have some questions like this later in this episode.

You are listening to Peter Eustinov as the famous detective Hercule Pio in the nineteen eighty one classic Agatha Christie movie Evil under the Sun. Here he poses questions which prove critical in him solving the mystery. We'll have some questions like this later in this episode.

I can't say I blame them.

I can't say I blame them.

This movie resonates with me as we unpicked the various clues which hold the key to the truth about Amy.

This movie resonates with me as we unpicked the various clues which hold the key to the truth about Amy.

All.

All.

Here Paro points out his pertinent points.

Here Paro points out his pertinent points.

I wish you to consider very carefully, a bathing cap, a bath, a bottle, a wristwatch, the diamond, the noonday gun, the breath of the sea, and the hate of the cliff. From that, you should be able to solve it yourselves.

I wish you to consider very carefully, a bathing cap, a bath, a bottle, a wristwatch, the diamond, the noonday gun, the breath of the sea, and the hate of the cliff. From that, you should be able to solve it yourselves.

We can compile a similar list, although not so glamorous and a bit more comprehensive. A passport, a selfie, a khaki jacket, a pink foone, the packed are, a missing door handle, the gun in the wardrobe, the position of the body, and the clothes David and Gareth provided to police. Of course, there's also the taking out of the wheelibins and all the phone calls that occurred just after Amy died. There are so many anomalies which need addressing.

We can compile a similar list, although not so glamorous and a bit more comprehensive. A passport, a selfie, a khaki jacket, a pink foone, the packed are, a missing door handle, the gun in the wardrobe, the position of the body, and the clothes David and Gareth provided to police. Of course, there's also the taking out of the wheelibins and all the phone calls that occurred just after Amy died. There are so many anomalies which need addressing.

And yes, fortunately police can't just gloss over things that don't make sense, and they need to verify Josh Bryden's movements around the time Amy died. Now that means speaking to all of those other witnesses who didn't want to be involved last time. We'll discuss more about this later, but for now, let's revisit our recent interview with Australia's own great detective, the good Cop, Ron Iddalls.

And yes, fortunately police can't just gloss over things that don't make sense, and they need to verify Josh Bryden's movements around the time Amy died. Now that means speaking to all of those other witnesses who didn't want to be involved last time. We'll discuss more about this later, but for now, let's revisit our recent interview with Australia's own great detective, the good Cop, Ron Iddalls.

Welcome, Ron, thank you, thank you for having me.

Welcome, Ron, thank you, thank you for having me.

When we caught up with Ron on conversations, he discussed the steps to take when investigating an unexplained sudden death, most importantly treating it as suspicious until you can prove it isn't.

When we caught up with Ron on conversations, he discussed the steps to take when investigating an unexplained sudden death, most importantly treating it as suspicious until you can prove it isn't.

It's a bit like ABC. Assume nothing, believe nothing, and check everything. The three classic things that you always look for motive, opportunity and capability. The truth is always in an an investigation, you've actually got to go out and find it, and at the moment, I don't think that's being done now.

It's a bit like ABC. Assume nothing, believe nothing, and check everything. The three classic things that you always look for motive, opportunity and capability. The truth is always in an an investigation, you've actually got to go out and find it, and at the moment, I don't think that's being done now.

Ron makes it very clear that while he believes Amy's death was mishandled by the investigating detectives who determined its suicide on the night she died. It is solvable, and that's the important point.

Ron makes it very clear that while he believes Amy's death was mishandled by the investigating detectives who determined its suicide on the night she died. It is solvable, and that's the important point.

It is so the two people that were at the house at the time, that's David and Gareth, they had statements taken them down at the front gate, sitting in the back of a police car. Now, before those statements were finished, the detective that had already said it was a suicide. Now that's impossible because you haven't even got a full detailed statement from the two people who are present. I think with further investigation, further publicity, it can still be redeemed. There are people out there who know exactly what happened, and it's a matter of locating those people. Carl Williams, who was an underworld figure in Melbourne who elderly died and was involved in four or five murders, had this thing and he said those who know don't talk, and those who talk don't know. But in the end that was all proved wrong. Those who knew always told someone. I don't know what they've done since the inquest, but what I'd be doing is who is David's assaysiate, who are his friends who he's been in contact with over the last three or four years. And I know it's ONNUS, but you would go around and speak to every one of those. You would go and speak to all Garris friends again, because sometimes with the passage of time, people's relationship change. And I think if you did that, you might actually find someone who says, this is what he told me, which is inconsistent to what the account that he gave back in June two thousand and fourteen. And then you couple that with all your evidence that you've found and you put it to the Office of Public Prosecutions.

It is so the two people that were at the house at the time, that's David and Gareth, they had statements taken them down at the front gate, sitting in the back of a police car. Now, before those statements were finished, the detective that had already said it was a suicide. Now that's impossible because you haven't even got a full detailed statement from the two people who are present. I think with further investigation, further publicity, it can still be redeemed. There are people out there who know exactly what happened, and it's a matter of locating those people. Carl Williams, who was an underworld figure in Melbourne who elderly died and was involved in four or five murders, had this thing and he said those who know don't talk, and those who talk don't know. But in the end that was all proved wrong. Those who knew always told someone. I don't know what they've done since the inquest, but what I'd be doing is who is David's assaysiate, who are his friends who he's been in contact with over the last three or four years. And I know it's ONNUS, but you would go around and speak to every one of those. You would go and speak to all Garris friends again, because sometimes with the passage of time, people's relationship change. And I think if you did that, you might actually find someone who says, this is what he told me, which is inconsistent to what the account that he gave back in June two thousand and fourteen. And then you couple that with all your evidence that you've found and you put it to the Office of Public Prosecutions.

Now. Last month, WA Police announced a cold case review was underway.

Now. Last month, WA Police announced a cold case review was underway.

The WA Police Force are currently investigating the death of Amy Wensley. The team are committed to investigating this matter professionally and doing their utmost to uncover new evidence. As this matter is currently under investigation, it would be premature to refer it to the ODPP at this stage. Once this investigation is complete, WA Police will present all findings of the task force to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for his consideration. The investigation team are making progress, however, no further details will be provided at this time. Operational details of the investigation team will not be revealed.

The WA Police Force are currently investigating the death of Amy Wensley. The team are committed to investigating this matter professionally and doing their utmost to uncover new evidence. As this matter is currently under investigation, it would be premature to refer it to the ODPP at this stage. Once this investigation is complete, WA Police will present all findings of the task force to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for his consideration. The investigation team are making progress, however, no further details will be provided at this time. Operational details of the investigation team will not be revealed.

So after WA Police provide an updated copy of the brief of evidence, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Robert Owen, decides whether Amy's case is strong enough to take to court. Amy's aunt, Anna Davy, recently reached out to mister Owen to see if he'd meet with her to discuss Amy's case and the way it's been handled. Dear Miss Davy, this is his reply, dated first of October.

So after WA Police provide an updated copy of the brief of evidence, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Robert Owen, decides whether Amy's case is strong enough to take to court. Amy's aunt, Anna Davy, recently reached out to mister Owen to see if he'd meet with her to discuss Amy's case and the way it's been handled. Dear Miss Davy, this is his reply, dated first of October.

Thank you for your letter dated nineteenth September twenty twenty four. I acknowledge how difficult raising these matters again with my office is likely to be for you and your family. I understand you are seeking justice for Amy, and that this reflects the love and sense of dignity her memory deserves. However, I am unable to provide a materially different response from the one you received from the ODPP on the first of November twenty nineteen, where the former director advised you that the ODPP is not an investigatory agency and we do not have the power to independently investigate allegations or complaints. The odpp's sole function is to prosecute indubtable criminal offenses. Once charges have been laid by investigative agencies such as WA Police. That function includes the assessment of the evidence gathered. If there is insufficient evidence, the ODPP isn't able to proceed. The ODP VP has no power to investigate the conduct of other agencies or to assess whether an investigation by WA Police was insufficient. In our letter to you, dated first of November twenty nineteen, we indicated that an inquest into your niece's death may be the appropriate forum to ventilate the matters you have raised. An inquest into the death of your niece has now been completed and the findings were delivered by the Deputy State Coroner on ninth of September twenty twenty one. The inquest followed a cold case review by WA Police in which further investigative strategies were used to determine whether any evidence could be obtained to establish criminality in relation to Amy's death. The review concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish the involvement of another person in Amy's death, and the matter was referred back to the State Coroner to continue the coronial proceedings. The ODPP received and assessed the evidence, which was obtained by WA Police in its cold case homicide review. At the time, the former Director did not con seated there to be sufficient evidence to prosecute a person in relation to Amy's death.

Thank you for your letter dated nineteenth September twenty twenty four. I acknowledge how difficult raising these matters again with my office is likely to be for you and your family. I understand you are seeking justice for Amy, and that this reflects the love and sense of dignity her memory deserves. However, I am unable to provide a materially different response from the one you received from the ODPP on the first of November twenty nineteen, where the former director advised you that the ODPP is not an investigatory agency and we do not have the power to independently investigate allegations or complaints. The odpp's sole function is to prosecute indubtable criminal offenses. Once charges have been laid by investigative agencies such as WA Police. That function includes the assessment of the evidence gathered. If there is insufficient evidence, the ODPP isn't able to proceed. The ODP VP has no power to investigate the conduct of other agencies or to assess whether an investigation by WA Police was insufficient. In our letter to you, dated first of November twenty nineteen, we indicated that an inquest into your niece's death may be the appropriate forum to ventilate the matters you have raised. An inquest into the death of your niece has now been completed and the findings were delivered by the Deputy State Coroner on ninth of September twenty twenty one. The inquest followed a cold case review by WA Police in which further investigative strategies were used to determine whether any evidence could be obtained to establish criminality in relation to Amy's death. The review concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish the involvement of another person in Amy's death, and the matter was referred back to the State Coroner to continue the coronial proceedings. The ODPP received and assessed the evidence, which was obtained by WA Police in its cold case homicide review. At the time, the former Director did not con seated there to be sufficient evidence to prosecute a person in relation to Amy's death.

As you are no.

As you are no.

Doubt aware, the Deputy State Coroner concluded that there was not enough evidence to make a formal finding about how Amy died. Accordingly, her honor made the open finding as to the manner of death. Although the state Coroner has the power to refer the matter to the ODPP, because the Deputy State Coroner found there was insufficient evidence that an indubtable offense had been committed, she did not refer the matter to the ODPP. The Deputy State Coroner did make some adverse comments about the standard of the initial police investigation and the limitations placed on the Coroner's ability to consider all relevant evidence. I've outlined this information only to ensure that you are informed about the evidence to date. I understand you are likely to be very familiar with what has occurred, and I mean no disrespect in doing so. At this time, the ODPP cannot undertake further steps or offer any other resolution in this case. Yours sincerely, Robert, Director of Public Prosecutions, dear.

Doubt aware, the Deputy State Coroner concluded that there was not enough evidence to make a formal finding about how Amy died. Accordingly, her honor made the open finding as to the manner of death. Although the state Coroner has the power to refer the matter to the ODPP, because the Deputy State Coroner found there was insufficient evidence that an indubtable offense had been committed, she did not refer the matter to the ODPP. The Deputy State Coroner did make some adverse comments about the standard of the initial police investigation and the limitations placed on the Coroner's ability to consider all relevant evidence. I've outlined this information only to ensure that you are informed about the evidence to date. I understand you are likely to be very familiar with what has occurred, and I mean no disrespect in doing so. At this time, the ODPP cannot undertake further steps or offer any other resolution in this case. Yours sincerely, Robert, Director of Public Prosecutions, dear.

Mister Owen, Anna writes back, thank.

Mister Owen, Anna writes back, thank.

You for replying to my recent letter and for confirming your office hasn't seen Amy's case file for at least five years. In twenty nineteen, Amy's case was still being wrongly treated as a suicide by WA Police. Now in twenty twenty four, Amy's case is being referred to as a homicide and there is a considerable amount of new evidence now available as per my previous letter, would you be willing to meet with me to discuss or is it a case that you won't seek any information from WA Police unless they raise it with you. Given my family seems to be at the complete mercy of WA Police, I just wanted to find out from you what it would take for your office to reconsider Amy's case. If, as a family we don't believe Amy's case is being handled properly, what avenues do we have do we go back to the WA Corption and Crime Commission. I'm sure you can understand our frustration, particularly given recent information that's come to light on Amy's case via Channel seven's podcast The Truth About Amy. I am devastatingly disappointed that I've had to fight the system for more than ten years now because of the catastrophic mistake made by members of the WA Police Force. I don't think it's asking too much to seek help from people like you who are in the position to provide some but for whatever reason, don't seem to want to offer any assistance at all. Regards Anna Davy.

You for replying to my recent letter and for confirming your office hasn't seen Amy's case file for at least five years. In twenty nineteen, Amy's case was still being wrongly treated as a suicide by WA Police. Now in twenty twenty four, Amy's case is being referred to as a homicide and there is a considerable amount of new evidence now available as per my previous letter, would you be willing to meet with me to discuss or is it a case that you won't seek any information from WA Police unless they raise it with you. Given my family seems to be at the complete mercy of WA Police, I just wanted to find out from you what it would take for your office to reconsider Amy's case. If, as a family we don't believe Amy's case is being handled properly, what avenues do we have do we go back to the WA Corption and Crime Commission. I'm sure you can understand our frustration, particularly given recent information that's come to light on Amy's case via Channel seven's podcast The Truth About Amy. I am devastatingly disappointed that I've had to fight the system for more than ten years now because of the catastrophic mistake made by members of the WA Police Force. I don't think it's asking too much to seek help from people like you who are in the position to provide some but for whatever reason, don't seem to want to offer any assistance at all. Regards Anna Davy.

It's unclear how mister Owen will react when he receives an updated brief into Amy's death, how thorough WA Police's reinvestigation will be, or whether they even recommend any action. But what's most troubling is a lack of accountability associated with decisions by the Director of Public Prosecutions, who are determines whether the case is strong enough to proceed with a criminal trial.

It's unclear how mister Owen will react when he receives an updated brief into Amy's death, how thorough WA Police's reinvestigation will be, or whether they even recommend any action. But what's most troubling is a lack of accountability associated with decisions by the Director of Public Prosecutions, who are determines whether the case is strong enough to proceed with a criminal trial.

I think the problem is that they have TANGI.

I think the problem is that they have TANGI.

This came up when we caught up with New South Wales Crime Commissioner and former State Coroner for both Queensland and New South Wales, Michael Barnes, who discussed what was at stake.

This came up when we caught up with New South Wales Crime Commissioner and former State Coroner for both Queensland and New South Wales, Michael Barnes, who discussed what was at stake.

Putting someone before the court is a serious impact on that individual. Being wrongly accused and then publicly tried, even if you are acquitted at the end of the day, is a very serious impact. So it's appropriate that the people making that decision do so cautiously. I think the problem is that they have intangible, almost unknowable assessments they must make. Is it in the public interest, is it likely to result in a conviction? Well, sitting in the office, reading your papers, looking at what the records of interview show seems to me to be a fairly difficult way to make an assessment of how a witness is going to perform in front of front of a jury, what they will say to questions that haven't yet been asked of them, how the expert witnesses will impact upon a jury's assessment. All of those things are very difficult to know with certainty. So if, as you say, there's a fifty to fifty chance, well, how do you decide which way it goes? You'd be aware of William Blackstone, a famous English jurist who is credited with saying that under the English legal system, it's better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent person is convicted. And I stand bothside that. I think that's extremely important. We can't have innocent people being locked up, but nor can we have people who are actually guilty of crimes not being brought to account. And the problem we've gotten the current system is if you were accused, there are multiple opportunities for you to vindicate yourself, for you to negate the proceedings brought against you. You usually have a committal proceeding in which you can seek to persuade the magistrate that the matter shouldn't go further forward. Even if you are committed for trial, you can make written submissions to the DPP, who will regularly listen to those submissions and decide that the matter shouldn't go to trial. If it goes to trial, you can make no case submission to the trial judge, saying there's no case for me to answer here. I shouldn't even have to go into evidence. And if you are convicted, of course you have all the appeal processes available to you. But people in the position of Amy's mother have no mechanism or process to contest the decision of the DPP and the police not to bring charges. That's quite surprising when you think about our commitment to transparency and accountability. Think of any other public official whose decisions aren't reviewable in any other circumstance. There's no mechanism that you can review the decision of a DPP even though they're making an assessment that isn't an objective, concrete decision that you can calibrate. It's not how many bricks were laid in a day, it's what will a jury think about these persons explanation for what happened.

Putting someone before the court is a serious impact on that individual. Being wrongly accused and then publicly tried, even if you are acquitted at the end of the day, is a very serious impact. So it's appropriate that the people making that decision do so cautiously. I think the problem is that they have intangible, almost unknowable assessments they must make. Is it in the public interest, is it likely to result in a conviction? Well, sitting in the office, reading your papers, looking at what the records of interview show seems to me to be a fairly difficult way to make an assessment of how a witness is going to perform in front of front of a jury, what they will say to questions that haven't yet been asked of them, how the expert witnesses will impact upon a jury's assessment. All of those things are very difficult to know with certainty. So if, as you say, there's a fifty to fifty chance, well, how do you decide which way it goes? You'd be aware of William Blackstone, a famous English jurist who is credited with saying that under the English legal system, it's better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent person is convicted. And I stand bothside that. I think that's extremely important. We can't have innocent people being locked up, but nor can we have people who are actually guilty of crimes not being brought to account. And the problem we've gotten the current system is if you were accused, there are multiple opportunities for you to vindicate yourself, for you to negate the proceedings brought against you. You usually have a committal proceeding in which you can seek to persuade the magistrate that the matter shouldn't go further forward. Even if you are committed for trial, you can make written submissions to the DPP, who will regularly listen to those submissions and decide that the matter shouldn't go to trial. If it goes to trial, you can make no case submission to the trial judge, saying there's no case for me to answer here. I shouldn't even have to go into evidence. And if you are convicted, of course you have all the appeal processes available to you. But people in the position of Amy's mother have no mechanism or process to contest the decision of the DPP and the police not to bring charges. That's quite surprising when you think about our commitment to transparency and accountability. Think of any other public official whose decisions aren't reviewable in any other circumstance. There's no mechanism that you can review the decision of a DPP even though they're making an assessment that isn't an objective, concrete decision that you can calibrate. It's not how many bricks were laid in a day, it's what will a jury think about these persons explanation for what happened.

Mister Barnes goes on to say that should the WA Director of Public Prosecutions decide there's not enough evidence for him to take the matter further, he doesn't even have to justify it.

Mister Barnes goes on to say that should the WA Director of Public Prosecutions decide there's not enough evidence for him to take the matter further, he doesn't even have to justify it.

The difficulty though, in the current circumstance, the DPP will look at it and you'll get a two line letter saying I don't consider there's a sufficient prospects of a conviction. If that's the course, they take, no reasons, no analysis of the evidence. You get this very perfunctory letter saying no, I know better than everybody else, it's not going to happen.

The difficulty though, in the current circumstance, the DPP will look at it and you'll get a two line letter saying I don't consider there's a sufficient prospects of a conviction. If that's the course, they take, no reasons, no analysis of the evidence. You get this very perfunctory letter saying no, I know better than everybody else, it's not going to happen.

Mister Barnes cites several examples where he's recommended charges be laid following an inquest, but the DPP refused.

Mister Barnes cites several examples where he's recommended charges be laid following an inquest, but the DPP refused.

I've never seen a perfect investigation, and in most of those cases, though there are problems, they can be remedied and the investigation brought back on track. But you're right to highlight that in a certain number of cases there are crucial errors made that cause the resolution of the matters to be very protracted and in some cases never resolved. I mean, everyone knows about the Chris Dawson case here in Sydney, now got a conviction but decades after the event. Similarly, there was a tragic case here involving a young American mathematician, Scott Johnson, who it took three inquests before we got a really strong police investigation that only last year resulted in someone pleading guilty and serving a lengthy term of imprisonment. So yes, there are these cases. As I say, most of the time police do a great job, but from time to time mistakes are made. Either someone's not charged or they are charged, and the system falls down somewhere else along the way, as you'd appreciate. Even when a charge is laid because police have got but they think is sufficient evidence, all of the other parts of the criminal justice system have to work appropriately. I was involved in another very sad case in New South Wales, but they had some unfortunate similarities and that the victim was a young Aboriginal woman with young children and a devoted family who died as a result of horrific internal injuries, that the two miscreants who were with a claim were the result of consensual sexual activity. The cops didn't go for that she had a blood alcohol reading way beyond which anyone could make any sorts of reasonable decisions, and the circumstances in which she was found dead on the beach, with the two individuals involved burning all her clothing and the mattress from the back of the car made it very obvious that there was more to the story the cops charged with causing the death. The DPP discontinued the charge. We run in quested, to my mind, made it abundantly clear that the version given by the two people who were with Lynnette on the day that she died weren't acceptable, couldn't have possibly been true, and therefore strongly recommended that the charges again be preferred. Despite those detailed findings, the DPP declined to do that, and only when a couple of media outlets got involved and drue attention to the case was the DPP persuaded the brief and outside External Council to give advice about whether or not charges could or should be laid. That council indicated that a conviction was likely. He was correct. He was brief to then run the trial, and guilty verdicts were return by a jury after a five day trial. They're only out for thirty two minutes before they found the men guilty, and they're now thankfully serving lengthy sentences. But that's just an example of how everything at every step along the way, problems can arise that frustrate the pursuit of justice.

I've never seen a perfect investigation, and in most of those cases, though there are problems, they can be remedied and the investigation brought back on track. But you're right to highlight that in a certain number of cases there are crucial errors made that cause the resolution of the matters to be very protracted and in some cases never resolved. I mean, everyone knows about the Chris Dawson case here in Sydney, now got a conviction but decades after the event. Similarly, there was a tragic case here involving a young American mathematician, Scott Johnson, who it took three inquests before we got a really strong police investigation that only last year resulted in someone pleading guilty and serving a lengthy term of imprisonment. So yes, there are these cases. As I say, most of the time police do a great job, but from time to time mistakes are made. Either someone's not charged or they are charged, and the system falls down somewhere else along the way, as you'd appreciate. Even when a charge is laid because police have got but they think is sufficient evidence, all of the other parts of the criminal justice system have to work appropriately. I was involved in another very sad case in New South Wales, but they had some unfortunate similarities and that the victim was a young Aboriginal woman with young children and a devoted family who died as a result of horrific internal injuries, that the two miscreants who were with a claim were the result of consensual sexual activity. The cops didn't go for that she had a blood alcohol reading way beyond which anyone could make any sorts of reasonable decisions, and the circumstances in which she was found dead on the beach, with the two individuals involved burning all her clothing and the mattress from the back of the car made it very obvious that there was more to the story the cops charged with causing the death. The DPP discontinued the charge. We run in quested, to my mind, made it abundantly clear that the version given by the two people who were with Lynnette on the day that she died weren't acceptable, couldn't have possibly been true, and therefore strongly recommended that the charges again be preferred. Despite those detailed findings, the DPP declined to do that, and only when a couple of media outlets got involved and drue attention to the case was the DPP persuaded the brief and outside External Council to give advice about whether or not charges could or should be laid. That council indicated that a conviction was likely. He was correct. He was brief to then run the trial, and guilty verdicts were return by a jury after a five day trial. They're only out for thirty two minutes before they found the men guilty, and they're now thankfully serving lengthy sentences. But that's just an example of how everything at every step along the way, problems can arise that frustrate the pursuit of justice.

Julianne's husband, Allan, said the women had gone out on a late night fishing trip near Atherton. They never came home.

Julianne's husband, Allan, said the women had gone out on a late night fishing trip near Atherton. They never came home.

One of those cases was a supposed murder suicide of Vicky Arnold and Julianne Lay.

One of those cases was a supposed murder suicide of Vicky Arnold and Julianne Lay.

Police ruled VICKI had killed Julianne and then turned the gun on herself.

Police ruled VICKI had killed Julianne and then turned the gun on herself.

I did the third in quest and said it was a homicide, and the DPP refused to charge.

I did the third in quest and said it was a homicide, and the DPP refused to charge.

The third inquest. Remember, Amy's case has only had one and the new evidence is expected to be enough to trigger another. But they're expensive and time consuming, and the family has been fighting for the case to be tested in court for more than a decade now. So why can't that be done?

The third inquest. Remember, Amy's case has only had one and the new evidence is expected to be enough to trigger another. But they're expensive and time consuming, and the family has been fighting for the case to be tested in court for more than a decade now. So why can't that be done?

Undoubtedly the work you've done has contributed to a softening of that position the difficulty, though in the current circumstance, the EPP will look at it and you'll get a two line letter saying I don't consider there's sufficient prospects of a conviction. If that's the course, they take, no reasons, no analysis of the evidence. You get this very perfunctory letter saying, no, I know better than everybody else, it's not going to happen.

Undoubtedly the work you've done has contributed to a softening of that position the difficulty, though in the current circumstance, the EPP will look at it and you'll get a two line letter saying I don't consider there's sufficient prospects of a conviction. If that's the course, they take, no reasons, no analysis of the evidence. You get this very perfunctory letter saying, no, I know better than everybody else, it's not going to happen.

Meanwhile, this begs the question, why are multiple inquests necessary when it will presumably lead to the same place.

Meanwhile, this begs the question, why are multiple inquests necessary when it will presumably lead to the same place.

You've heard of the term therapeutic jurist rudens and coroners have been beaten around their head a bit on that score in the last decord or so that you've got research that suggests, in some cases unfortunately significant number of cases, the inquest have made things worse for the bereaved, and of course that's not what croners are inclined to do. There's also lack of consistent practice among coroners as to their role in suspected homicides. Some will say, we are not there to investigate crimes, We're only there to find the manner and cause of death, and that's the police and the DPP who've got to do crime. Therefore, we don't want to get involved in that. There are very significant differences in views about what the role of the coroner in suspected homicide is. Under the modern coronial system. It used to be a major part of their role and no one could go to trial in New South Wales unless they'd been committed for trial by the coroner. The eighties and nineties there's a big move away from that. Coroners are seen to have focus more on prevention. Was suggested that coron is unfairly damaging people's reputation and a lot of coroners, a significant proportion of coroners are not interested in reviewing their role in that regard. They see themselves as something different from the criminal justice.

You've heard of the term therapeutic jurist rudens and coroners have been beaten around their head a bit on that score in the last decord or so that you've got research that suggests, in some cases unfortunately significant number of cases, the inquest have made things worse for the bereaved, and of course that's not what croners are inclined to do. There's also lack of consistent practice among coroners as to their role in suspected homicides. Some will say, we are not there to investigate crimes, We're only there to find the manner and cause of death, and that's the police and the DPP who've got to do crime. Therefore, we don't want to get involved in that. There are very significant differences in views about what the role of the coroner in suspected homicide is. Under the modern coronial system. It used to be a major part of their role and no one could go to trial in New South Wales unless they'd been committed for trial by the coroner. The eighties and nineties there's a big move away from that. Coroners are seen to have focus more on prevention. Was suggested that coron is unfairly damaging people's reputation and a lot of coroners, a significant proportion of coroners are not interested in reviewing their role in that regard. They see themselves as something different from the criminal justice.

We contacted the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions about this, which replied swiftly with the following.

We contacted the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions about this, which replied swiftly with the following.

The ODPP receives indictable prosecutions after the charges have been laid in the Summary Court by the Investigative Agency WA. Police prosecutions are assigned to suitable, experienced and qualified prosecutors. According to the complexity and seriousness of the matter. Any decision to commence or discontinue a prosecution is reviewed and authorized by a more senior prosecutor. Where the matter is proceeding to trial, a further pre trial review is conducted by a consultant state prosecutor, who are our most senior prosecutors. Where there are no reasonable prospects of conviction, a prosecution cannot proceed. Additionally, victims have the power to request a further review of the prosecutorial decisions which recommend discontinuance, in accordance with the Policy and Guidelines for Victims of Crime twenty twenty two. Of course, all prosecutions are critically reviewed by an accused counsel, overseen by a judicial officer through the court proceedings, and are ultimately reviewable by the Court of Appeal. The ODPP also provides a formal charge advice function at the request of an investigative agency, predominantly wa police. The ODPP and investigative agencies have an independent function within the criminal justice system, and it is a matter for the investigative agency as to whether they accept that advice and decide whether to lay charges or not. A setout in Paragraphs sixteen to seventeen of the ODPP Media Policy at Appendix three of the Guidelines. It is the odpp's policy to provide reasons to a court for the discontinuance of a prosecution unless the discontinuance is for administrative purposes only, or to do so would prejudice the administration of justice or cause heart to a victim, witness, or accused. It is proper to publicly explain the odpp's approach to the question of whether a prosecution is to continue or be terminated by reference to the factors in the DPP Statement of Prosecution Policy and guidelines, for example, by reference to the lack of a prima facie case, lack of reasonable prospects of conviction, or that there is no public interest in proceeding.

The ODPP receives indictable prosecutions after the charges have been laid in the Summary Court by the Investigative Agency WA. Police prosecutions are assigned to suitable, experienced and qualified prosecutors. According to the complexity and seriousness of the matter. Any decision to commence or discontinue a prosecution is reviewed and authorized by a more senior prosecutor. Where the matter is proceeding to trial, a further pre trial review is conducted by a consultant state prosecutor, who are our most senior prosecutors. Where there are no reasonable prospects of conviction, a prosecution cannot proceed. Additionally, victims have the power to request a further review of the prosecutorial decisions which recommend discontinuance, in accordance with the Policy and Guidelines for Victims of Crime twenty twenty two. Of course, all prosecutions are critically reviewed by an accused counsel, overseen by a judicial officer through the court proceedings, and are ultimately reviewable by the Court of Appeal. The ODPP also provides a formal charge advice function at the request of an investigative agency, predominantly wa police. The ODPP and investigative agencies have an independent function within the criminal justice system, and it is a matter for the investigative agency as to whether they accept that advice and decide whether to lay charges or not. A setout in Paragraphs sixteen to seventeen of the ODPP Media Policy at Appendix three of the Guidelines. It is the odpp's policy to provide reasons to a court for the discontinuance of a prosecution unless the discontinuance is for administrative purposes only, or to do so would prejudice the administration of justice or cause heart to a victim, witness, or accused. It is proper to publicly explain the odpp's approach to the question of whether a prosecution is to continue or be terminated by reference to the factors in the DPP Statement of Prosecution Policy and guidelines, for example, by reference to the lack of a prima facie case, lack of reasonable prospects of conviction, or that there is no public interest in proceeding.

Where appropriate brief.

Where appropriate brief.

Additional information by way of explanation can be provided, we refer you to the odpp's Media Policy, in particular a paragraph elevan in relation to further guidelines regarding the provision of information when additional information is sought by media organizations. These factors include that paramount need to ensure the integrity of the criminal trial process, including any potential future trial, the sensitivity of the information sought and the interests of victims and witnesses.

Additional information by way of explanation can be provided, we refer you to the odpp's Media Policy, in particular a paragraph elevan in relation to further guidelines regarding the provision of information when additional information is sought by media organizations. These factors include that paramount need to ensure the integrity of the criminal trial process, including any potential future trial, the sensitivity of the information sought and the interests of victims and witnesses.

That response was provided by the Director of Public Prosecutions Executive Assistant Margaret Ferry, and also reference the officer's Deputy Director, Justin Waley SC and Director of Legal Services Matt Bug. What they seem to be saying is that victims, not victims families can only apply for review if they wish to discontinue the case, and it's still up to WA Police whether they wish to proceed with charges. But back to Michael Barnes who also suggested WA Police seek the advice of a suicidologist.

That response was provided by the Director of Public Prosecutions Executive Assistant Margaret Ferry, and also reference the officer's Deputy Director, Justin Waley SC and Director of Legal Services Matt Bug. What they seem to be saying is that victims, not victims families can only apply for review if they wish to discontinue the case, and it's still up to WA Police whether they wish to proceed with charges. But back to Michael Barnes who also suggested WA Police seek the advice of a suicidologist.

I'm not intimately familiar with a with Australian legislation, but generally currents need to be persuaded. There's fresh evidence that wasn't considered at the previous inquest. It's not appropriate simply to have another inquest because someone doesn't like the outcome of the first inquest, so they would need to be able to persuade the current There was fresh evidence that hadn't been considered at the inquest that's already been pleaded, that could lead to a different outcome and something that strikes me in this case. It's and I said, I'm not familiar with all of the evidence. I haven't read all of the exhibits, but I haven't seen any reference to expert suicide ology. One. It is very well renowned homicide detective and I know you've interviewed, mentioned how he was surprised by the circumstances, alleged that he'd never seen a suicide where a young woman had shot herself in such an awkward position and such a difficult circumstance. When had she been inclined to do that? There were other more convenient ways that should have been done. And Ronz White as he said, he's looked at a thousand cases. There are experts have looked at tens and hundreds of thousands of suicides. They undertake what they call psychological autopsy, so look at the victimology of the person and not the circumstances of the death, and can offer expert advice about whether people do ever kill themselves in this way. The Scott Johnson matter I mentioned before, the police rated off as a suicide in I think about two weeks He was found naked at the bottom of a cliff. His clothes neatly folded at the top of the cliff. It was easy for our suicidologists to say that people don't like themselves to be found in an undignified manner, even though they know they're going to be dead, so you don't take your clothes off before you jump to your death. That sort of expert evidence doesn't seem to have been brought to bear in this case.

I'm not intimately familiar with a with Australian legislation, but generally currents need to be persuaded. There's fresh evidence that wasn't considered at the previous inquest. It's not appropriate simply to have another inquest because someone doesn't like the outcome of the first inquest, so they would need to be able to persuade the current There was fresh evidence that hadn't been considered at the inquest that's already been pleaded, that could lead to a different outcome and something that strikes me in this case. It's and I said, I'm not familiar with all of the evidence. I haven't read all of the exhibits, but I haven't seen any reference to expert suicide ology. One. It is very well renowned homicide detective and I know you've interviewed, mentioned how he was surprised by the circumstances, alleged that he'd never seen a suicide where a young woman had shot herself in such an awkward position and such a difficult circumstance. When had she been inclined to do that? There were other more convenient ways that should have been done. And Ronz White as he said, he's looked at a thousand cases. There are experts have looked at tens and hundreds of thousands of suicides. They undertake what they call psychological autopsy, so look at the victimology of the person and not the circumstances of the death, and can offer expert advice about whether people do ever kill themselves in this way. The Scott Johnson matter I mentioned before, the police rated off as a suicide in I think about two weeks He was found naked at the bottom of a cliff. His clothes neatly folded at the top of the cliff. It was easy for our suicidologists to say that people don't like themselves to be found in an undignified manner, even though they know they're going to be dead, so you don't take your clothes off before you jump to your death. That sort of expert evidence doesn't seem to have been brought to bear in this case.

Now.

Now.

While a suicideologist wasn't consulted prior to the inquest, WA police sought analysis from Major crime clinical psychologist Dr Chris Geeson on whether David Simmons was telling the truth in his interviews with police and if Amy was suicidal.

While a suicideologist wasn't consulted prior to the inquest, WA police sought analysis from Major crime clinical psychologist Dr Chris Geeson on whether David Simmons was telling the truth in his interviews with police and if Amy was suicidal.

I'm inclined to believe David Woman's version of events and that Amy shot herself. I did not observe any seminal inconsistencies in his account, even with the retelling of it in parts, nor did I see any obvious behavior that suggested he was censoring his disclosures or constructing a story. I also noted that his response to questions were mostly spontaneous with minimal lag, suggesting he was not cautious or apprehensive about what he was disclosing or considering the implications of what he was disclosing. While there were intermittent pauses, these appeared to indicate he was trying to recall particular events in response to the interviewer's questions. This was indicated by his tentative responses I think and I'm not sure. I note that he responded this way even when the questions weren't critically relevant. I also noted that mister Simmons' emotional reactions i e. Expression, effect, and emotion was congruent with the content being disclosed at that point in the interview. What I mean by this is that when he became visually distressed, for example, this was both relevant and proportionate to that being disclosed. Further, when he recounted supposedly finding Miss Wensley in the bedroom after she had been shot, his reaction in the interview was intense distress, disbelief, and horror, with his nonverbal behavior supporting this. His behavior, for example, running around and dropping to the floor when he found Miss Wensley had been shot, is also consistent with these observed emotions and proportionate to the event. Mister Price's description of Miss Simmons also supports this congruency. Saying that he heard mister Simmons repeat fuck, fuck fuck and appearing in shock. I also noted that mister simmons reaction to the interviewer's reaction was indifferent to his responses. This suggested to me that he was not focused on whether or not the interviewers were accepting his version of events, i e. Being believed. This again suggests to me that Simmons was retelling his experiences from memory rather than constructing them. For these reasons, I'm inclined to accept David Simmons' version of events.

I'm inclined to believe David Woman's version of events and that Amy shot herself. I did not observe any seminal inconsistencies in his account, even with the retelling of it in parts, nor did I see any obvious behavior that suggested he was censoring his disclosures or constructing a story. I also noted that his response to questions were mostly spontaneous with minimal lag, suggesting he was not cautious or apprehensive about what he was disclosing or considering the implications of what he was disclosing. While there were intermittent pauses, these appeared to indicate he was trying to recall particular events in response to the interviewer's questions. This was indicated by his tentative responses I think and I'm not sure. I note that he responded this way even when the questions weren't critically relevant. I also noted that mister Simmons' emotional reactions i e. Expression, effect, and emotion was congruent with the content being disclosed at that point in the interview. What I mean by this is that when he became visually distressed, for example, this was both relevant and proportionate to that being disclosed. Further, when he recounted supposedly finding Miss Wensley in the bedroom after she had been shot, his reaction in the interview was intense distress, disbelief, and horror, with his nonverbal behavior supporting this. His behavior, for example, running around and dropping to the floor when he found Miss Wensley had been shot, is also consistent with these observed emotions and proportionate to the event. Mister Price's description of Miss Simmons also supports this congruency. Saying that he heard mister Simmons repeat fuck, fuck fuck and appearing in shock. I also noted that mister simmons reaction to the interviewer's reaction was indifferent to his responses. This suggested to me that he was not focused on whether or not the interviewers were accepting his version of events, i e. Being believed. This again suggests to me that Simmons was retelling his experiences from memory rather than constructing them. For these reasons, I'm inclined to accept David Simmons' version of events.

Doctor Geson then goes into whether it was likely Simmons killed Amy or that she took her own life.

Doctor Geson then goes into whether it was likely Simmons killed Amy or that she took her own life.

Homicides can generally be categorized into two types, either being emotional and spontaneous or planned unintentional. I'm inclined to consider that neither of these scenarios fit the circumstances surrounding Miss Wensley's death to any convincing degree. Firstly, if mister Simmons had killed miss Wensley and staged the scene to look like an apparent suicide, then it would have needed to be an emotional reaction and spontaneous decision rather than a planned event.

Homicides can generally be categorized into two types, either being emotional and spontaneous or planned unintentional. I'm inclined to consider that neither of these scenarios fit the circumstances surrounding Miss Wensley's death to any convincing degree. Firstly, if mister Simmons had killed miss Wensley and staged the scene to look like an apparent suicide, then it would have needed to be an emotional reaction and spontaneous decision rather than a planned event.

Here, doctor Geson argues, if planned a suicide, note would have been fabricated and better placement of the weapon. Simmons would have argued that Amy was depressed and suicidal, so she concludes that unlikely. She does concede Simmons is described as physically abusive with a propensity for violence when intoxicated, but suggests that Price would have needed to be complicit in Simmons killing Amy.

Here, doctor Geson argues, if planned a suicide, note would have been fabricated and better placement of the weapon. Simmons would have argued that Amy was depressed and suicidal, so she concludes that unlikely. She does concede Simmons is described as physically abusive with a propensity for violence when intoxicated, but suggests that Price would have needed to be complicit in Simmons killing Amy.

Collusion seems unlikely. I say this because the events described and the language used by mister Simmons and mister Price are different, suggesting that they had actually observed the events and had done so from different fontage points. If they had colluded, I would have expected them to use the same language and narrative, since this is how information is retained when not actually observed. For example, after miss Wensley supposedly discharged the firearm, mister Symons said he heard a thud, whereas mister Price describes a crack like a thud. Another example is when mister Price describes hearing a smashing sound and hearing one of the kids saying Miss Wensley had flipped the lizard tank, while mister Simmons heard his daughter say Miss Wensley had smashed the fish tank if they had colluded, I would also not expect mister Price to disclose to police that mister Simmons called Miss Wensley a gutless piece of shit, or that he heard mister Simmons saying to Miss Wensley, pack your bags and fuck off, as these commons placed mister Simmons in a poor questioning light. Further, if mister Simmons had killed Miss Wensley in an emotional and impulsive rage, I would have expected a longer lag between Miss Wensley being shot and mister simmons arrival at the service station, with this time being needed to create a plausible story of Miss Wensley's death. Yet there is a lag of just sixteen minutes from the time Amy phones her mother and the triple zero call to the service station. When including the four minute drive from the house to the service station and Miss Wensley's three minute call to her mother according to phone records, this means there is now only nine minutes for any colluding and staging to occur. We also need to consider that a proportion of these nine minutes needs to be allocated for mister Simmons recovering from the shock of comprehending his actions and be sufficiently stable to disclose the events to mister Price and construct an alternative story. Another portion of this time but also need to be attributed to Miss Wensley placing her daughters in the car and making four trips from the house to the car to collect belongings. Hence, given all of these events that needed to occur within the nine minute period, any staging or colluding between mister Simmons and mister Price seems unlikely. These challenges make me consider that homicide, whether planned and intentional or impulsive and emotional, is unlikely.

Collusion seems unlikely. I say this because the events described and the language used by mister Simmons and mister Price are different, suggesting that they had actually observed the events and had done so from different fontage points. If they had colluded, I would have expected them to use the same language and narrative, since this is how information is retained when not actually observed. For example, after miss Wensley supposedly discharged the firearm, mister Symons said he heard a thud, whereas mister Price describes a crack like a thud. Another example is when mister Price describes hearing a smashing sound and hearing one of the kids saying Miss Wensley had flipped the lizard tank, while mister Simmons heard his daughter say Miss Wensley had smashed the fish tank if they had colluded, I would also not expect mister Price to disclose to police that mister Simmons called Miss Wensley a gutless piece of shit, or that he heard mister Simmons saying to Miss Wensley, pack your bags and fuck off, as these commons placed mister Simmons in a poor questioning light. Further, if mister Simmons had killed Miss Wensley in an emotional and impulsive rage, I would have expected a longer lag between Miss Wensley being shot and mister simmons arrival at the service station, with this time being needed to create a plausible story of Miss Wensley's death. Yet there is a lag of just sixteen minutes from the time Amy phones her mother and the triple zero call to the service station. When including the four minute drive from the house to the service station and Miss Wensley's three minute call to her mother according to phone records, this means there is now only nine minutes for any colluding and staging to occur. We also need to consider that a proportion of these nine minutes needs to be allocated for mister Simmons recovering from the shock of comprehending his actions and be sufficiently stable to disclose the events to mister Price and construct an alternative story. Another portion of this time but also need to be attributed to Miss Wensley placing her daughters in the car and making four trips from the house to the car to collect belongings. Hence, given all of these events that needed to occur within the nine minute period, any staging or colluding between mister Simmons and mister Price seems unlikely. These challenges make me consider that homicide, whether planned and intentional or impulsive and emotional, is unlikely.

So there you have it. If two people have different versions of the same event, it's actually more likely that they're telling the truth according to the logic of WA Police. But just something for WA Police to contemplate here. Is there the slightest possibility that Gareth Price just believes his best mate when he's told him he didn't shoot Amy.

So there you have it. If two people have different versions of the same event, it's actually more likely that they're telling the truth according to the logic of WA Police. But just something for WA Police to contemplate here. Is there the slightest possibility that Gareth Price just believes his best mate when he's told him he didn't shoot Amy.

No, he didn't fuckynure it.

No, he didn't fuckynure it.

He didn't know it. Sorry, this is what Gareth told me when I asked him about it.

He didn't know it. Sorry, this is what Gareth told me when I asked him about it.

Now, Simo is a good buddy man, He is a good man.

Now, Simo is a good buddy man, He is a good man.

He wouldn't have done in the first place. Well, I know that FO one hundred percent, he wouldn't have done it.

He wouldn't have done in the first place. Well, I know that FO one hundred percent, he wouldn't have done it.

Doctor Geeson now discusses Amy.

Doctor Geeson now discusses Amy.

Miss Wensley, appears to have been depressed at the time of her death. In the week prior to her death, she said she felt depressed and apparently said she wanted to change to another antidepressant medication because her current medication was not working.

Miss Wensley, appears to have been depressed at the time of her death. In the week prior to her death, she said she felt depressed and apparently said she wanted to change to another antidepressant medication because her current medication was not working.

Okay, stopping here. Apparently now none of this is attributed and we can't find a record of this being said, but it's part of the narrative which leads to doctor Geeson concluding Amy took her own life, along with the following host natal depression, after having tay four years of a controlling, unstable and abusive relationship with mister Symons, social isolation, financial stress, a motor vehicle accident in March twenty thirteen causing spinal injuries and pain, affecting quality of life, two pregnancy terminations in twenty thirteen, poor body image, and self worth.

Okay, stopping here. Apparently now none of this is attributed and we can't find a record of this being said, but it's part of the narrative which leads to doctor Geeson concluding Amy took her own life, along with the following host natal depression, after having tay four years of a controlling, unstable and abusive relationship with mister Symons, social isolation, financial stress, a motor vehicle accident in March twenty thirteen causing spinal injuries and pain, affecting quality of life, two pregnancy terminations in twenty thirteen, poor body image, and self worth.

This was compounded by further isolation when her partner, mister Simmons commenced fi FO around February twenty fourteen, leaving her to meet the demands of two young children on her own, and then moving to a rural property in Serpentine in March or April twenty fourteen. Miss Wensley's medical notes show that on twenty six February twenty fourteen, she was prescribed escitalapram, an antidepressant medication. This was after she described several months of low mood, anxiety, worrying about little things, anedonia or loss of joy, poor appetite, and sleep to servants. The medical notes say she had no thoughts of self harm at the time, although I see in her medical file there was a prior report of thoughts of self harm. Her follow up GP consult a month later, on thirty one March twenty fourteen, noted that Miss Wensley described some improvement in her mood, but that her partner had noticed it more than her. She also said she was drinking alcohol when she normally doesn't and was struggling with insomnia and irrational fears. While Miss Wensley did not appear suicidal in the weak prior, as she made no disclosures to her friends and family, depression is known to be the strongest predictor of suicide when this is combined with her other risk factors impulsivity, aggression, paranoia, irritability, in irrationality, helplessness and hopelessness, loss and rejection, then the possibility of a successful suicide attempt, unfortunately becomes more likely.

This was compounded by further isolation when her partner, mister Simmons commenced fi FO around February twenty fourteen, leaving her to meet the demands of two young children on her own, and then moving to a rural property in Serpentine in March or April twenty fourteen. Miss Wensley's medical notes show that on twenty six February twenty fourteen, she was prescribed escitalapram, an antidepressant medication. This was after she described several months of low mood, anxiety, worrying about little things, anedonia or loss of joy, poor appetite, and sleep to servants. The medical notes say she had no thoughts of self harm at the time, although I see in her medical file there was a prior report of thoughts of self harm. Her follow up GP consult a month later, on thirty one March twenty fourteen, noted that Miss Wensley described some improvement in her mood, but that her partner had noticed it more than her. She also said she was drinking alcohol when she normally doesn't and was struggling with insomnia and irrational fears. While Miss Wensley did not appear suicidal in the weak prior, as she made no disclosures to her friends and family, depression is known to be the strongest predictor of suicide when this is combined with her other risk factors impulsivity, aggression, paranoia, irritability, in irrationality, helplessness and hopelessness, loss and rejection, then the possibility of a successful suicide attempt, unfortunately becomes more likely.

Dr Geeson goes on to say that while uncommon, there have been links between acetuleopram and increased risk of suicide, suggesting Amy suffered a rare adverse reaction to esse telepram, or that the taking of the medication, and this is a direct quote from her report, alleviated the inertia of depression and activated problem solving and action, with suicide being considered a viable solution to escaping severe emotional pain and distress associated with depression. So, in other words, upon finally being able to think clearly and rationally, Amy realized her situation was absolutely hopeless and the best option was to take her own life. Now, I'm no expert, I certainly haven't got a psych degree, but that seems to me to be a very, very long bow to draw. It would be interesting to see whether that analysis would be backed up by other independent psychological analysts.

Dr Geeson goes on to say that while uncommon, there have been links between acetuleopram and increased risk of suicide, suggesting Amy suffered a rare adverse reaction to esse telepram, or that the taking of the medication, and this is a direct quote from her report, alleviated the inertia of depression and activated problem solving and action, with suicide being considered a viable solution to escaping severe emotional pain and distress associated with depression. So, in other words, upon finally being able to think clearly and rationally, Amy realized her situation was absolutely hopeless and the best option was to take her own life. Now, I'm no expert, I certainly haven't got a psych degree, but that seems to me to be a very, very long bow to draw. It would be interesting to see whether that analysis would be backed up by other independent psychological analysts.

Based on these historical and temporal events, my conclusion is miss Wensley's death was the result of suicide Chris Geesan twenty two March twenty nineteen.

Based on these historical and temporal events, my conclusion is miss Wensley's death was the result of suicide Chris Geesan twenty two March twenty nineteen.

And something worth noting here. Doctor Geeson never met David Simmons, hasn't spoken face to face with him once, nor obviously Amy. Her assessment is based on police statements and video interviews. We will be revisiting the psychological profiles of Amy and David Simmons in coming weeks.

And something worth noting here. Doctor Geeson never met David Simmons, hasn't spoken face to face with him once, nor obviously Amy. Her assessment is based on police statements and video interviews. We will be revisiting the psychological profiles of Amy and David Simmons in coming weeks.

I actually run.

I actually run.

At the University of Newcastle, the Justice Clinic, and I established that in twenty nineteen.

At the University of Newcastle, the Justice Clinic, and I established that in twenty nineteen.

In the meantime we caught up with another expert who offered other insight.

In the meantime we caught up with another expert who offered other insight.

It was initially called an Innocence Initiative, but we changed the name because we do look at cases of mischaracters of justice frong for conviction. But then when we established it, people started coming to us with all sorts of different cases, long term cold cases for example, but also what we've now classed as misclassification of death cases or those hidden homicides. And we've worked through with a number of families in the Justice Clinic, and we still have a number of ongoing cases of exactly that hidden homicide. So it's something we've been looking at at the University of Newcastle since I would think around twenty twenty, and sadly it's a lot more prevalent than I ever imagined until those families started contacting us and saying, can you please help my loved one's death was ruled a suicide or misadventure. And sometimes you look at these cases and I can't detail them because they're obviously classified. We're working through them legally. But yeah, you know, you look at it and go, how on earth was that classified as a suicide when you look at the facts of the case.

It was initially called an Innocence Initiative, but we changed the name because we do look at cases of mischaracters of justice frong for conviction. But then when we established it, people started coming to us with all sorts of different cases, long term cold cases for example, but also what we've now classed as misclassification of death cases or those hidden homicides. And we've worked through with a number of families in the Justice Clinic, and we still have a number of ongoing cases of exactly that hidden homicide. So it's something we've been looking at at the University of Newcastle since I would think around twenty twenty, and sadly it's a lot more prevalent than I ever imagined until those families started contacting us and saying, can you please help my loved one's death was ruled a suicide or misadventure. And sometimes you look at these cases and I can't detail them because they're obviously classified. We're working through them legally. But yeah, you know, you look at it and go, how on earth was that classified as a suicide when you look at the facts of the case.

Doctor Mallet is a forensic anthropologist and criminologist at the University of Newcastle who was also explored in detail the efficacy of expert witness evidence and the impact of external influences that may result in bias or prejudice in the decision making processes of duras.

Doctor Mallet is a forensic anthropologist and criminologist at the University of Newcastle who was also explored in detail the efficacy of expert witness evidence and the impact of external influences that may result in bias or prejudice in the decision making processes of duras.

So this falls into that very much, that category, doesn't it? Of suspicious deaths? I mean, I guess one of the biggest questions for me looking at this as a forensic scientist and behavioral expert, is how on earth the detectives arrived at that scene and classified this so quickly is not suspicious as a suicide? Obviously the uniform officers believed that this was suspicious, but the detective seemed so keen to dismiss this very, very quickly. And that's a pattern that I've seen in hidden homicides. It's that initial response, that lack of interest in capturing the scene forensically, lack of interest in interviewing those key witnesses, and so sadly, it was all too familiar when I read those initial stages of the investigation and what had gone so obviously horribly wrong.

So this falls into that very much, that category, doesn't it? Of suspicious deaths? I mean, I guess one of the biggest questions for me looking at this as a forensic scientist and behavioral expert, is how on earth the detectives arrived at that scene and classified this so quickly is not suspicious as a suicide? Obviously the uniform officers believed that this was suspicious, but the detective seemed so keen to dismiss this very, very quickly. And that's a pattern that I've seen in hidden homicides. It's that initial response, that lack of interest in capturing the scene forensically, lack of interest in interviewing those key witnesses, and so sadly, it was all too familiar when I read those initial stages of the investigation and what had gone so obviously horribly wrong.

Madam.

Madam.

Obviously everyone would like a water tight case, but this isn't an Agatha Christie murder mystery where everything is tied up with a bow at the end.

Obviously everyone would like a water tight case, but this isn't an Agatha Christie murder mystery where everything is tied up with a bow at the end.

I have discovered the identity of the murder of Madame Martha.

I have discovered the identity of the murder of Madame Martha.

Very seldom does the culprit confess to a complicated, convoluted execution of a crime after the detective has pointed out the inconsistence. But if proper time and resources are spent on it now, maybe they'll save a considerable amount of money in the long term. And there are plenty of other cost effective ways to reach a conclusion which won't be tainted by fears of organizational bias.

Very seldom does the culprit confess to a complicated, convoluted execution of a crime after the detective has pointed out the inconsistence. But if proper time and resources are spent on it now, maybe they'll save a considerable amount of money in the long term. And there are plenty of other cost effective ways to reach a conclusion which won't be tainted by fears of organizational bias.

I've only lost three murder trials out of three hundred. I've had a couple of briefs that have gone to the Director of Public Prosecutions and it's come back in sufficient evidence. In this case, I think the bio mechanic engineer, and more so the reconstruction that you have done with the expert from America is pretty telling stuff. I'm a detective and I looked at the photos and the right hand is under the right leg, so the only way that she could have pulled the trigger was with her left hand. And if you try to hold a fourteen shotgun in the position that she was and get a ninety degree horizontal entry and exit, it's impossible.

I've only lost three murder trials out of three hundred. I've had a couple of briefs that have gone to the Director of Public Prosecutions and it's come back in sufficient evidence. In this case, I think the bio mechanic engineer, and more so the reconstruction that you have done with the expert from America is pretty telling stuff. I'm a detective and I looked at the photos and the right hand is under the right leg, so the only way that she could have pulled the trigger was with her left hand. And if you try to hold a fourteen shotgun in the position that she was and get a ninety degree horizontal entry and exit, it's impossible.

It's recommends officers tasked with reinvestigating Amy's case need to do so with an open mind and distance themselves from those who remain convinced Amy killed herself and no amount of new evidence will be strong enough to lead to a conviction.

It's recommends officers tasked with reinvestigating Amy's case need to do so with an open mind and distance themselves from those who remain convinced Amy killed herself and no amount of new evidence will be strong enough to lead to a conviction.

I think there definitely should have been an open mind. After I made my statement for the Currner's court, they then got a superintendent to read my report and to produce a report. Now I listened to his evidence at the Currenter's court and he said everything was done. It was all done properly, although he conceded mistakes at the crime scene, but he said, I can tell you now she took her own life. Well, that is just a closed mind. And I've got to tell you, in forty two years, I've had to go up against the brotherhood and not once has anyone ever apologized to me of families that we got it wrong.

I think there definitely should have been an open mind. After I made my statement for the Currner's court, they then got a superintendent to read my report and to produce a report. Now I listened to his evidence at the Currenter's court and he said everything was done. It was all done properly, although he conceded mistakes at the crime scene, but he said, I can tell you now she took her own life. Well, that is just a closed mind. And I've got to tell you, in forty two years, I've had to go up against the brotherhood and not once has anyone ever apologized to me of families that we got it wrong.

The most senior ranking officer who appeared at Amy's inquest was Detective Superintendent Rob Scantalberry, and he was adamant that Amy's death was suicide.

The most senior ranking officer who appeared at Amy's inquest was Detective Superintendent Rob Scantalberry, and he was adamant that Amy's death was suicide.

Detective Superintendent, my name is miss Tyler. I'm counsel assisting the coroner. Could you state your full name.

Detective Superintendent, my name is miss Tyler. I'm counsel assisting the coroner. Could you state your full name.

Robert Anthony Scantlebury.

Robert Anthony Scantlebury.

And you're currently a detective superintendent with WA Police.

And you're currently a detective superintendent with WA Police.

Yes, I am Major Crime Division.

Yes, I am Major Crime Division.

You've been a police officer for thirty one years. Is that right?

You've been a police officer for thirty one years. Is that right?

That's correct?

That's correct?

All right?

All right?

Were you personally involved in any of the investigations into Amy's death.

Were you personally involved in any of the investigations into Amy's death.

No.

No.

I understand that you also obtained some coronial information to assist the coroner in relation to firearms deaths from twenty fourteen to twenty twenty. That's correct, Is it your understanding that firearm related deaths in where in Australia.

I understand that you also obtained some coronial information to assist the coroner in relation to firearms deaths from twenty fourteen to twenty twenty. That's correct, Is it your understanding that firearm related deaths in where in Australia.

Generally are rare. Yes.

Generally are rare. Yes.

Do you have a view as to why that is.

Do you have a view as to why that is.

Not really apart from the gun licensing laws in Western Australia.

Not really apart from the gun licensing laws in Western Australia.

A question of accessibility, Yes, all right. You also provided a copy of an extract from the WA Police manual that relates to firearm deaths.

A question of accessibility, Yes, all right. You also provided a copy of an extract from the WA Police manual that relates to firearm deaths.

Yes.

Yes.

This is effectively a step by step account of what should occur when a firearm related death is being investigated by police.

This is effectively a step by step account of what should occur when a firearm related death is being investigated by police.

Is that right?

Is that right?

That's yes, it's under review, so that's the current one.

That's yes, it's under review, so that's the current one.

Was that policy or aspect of the manual in place in twenty fourteen, yes, alright in your view, then was that policy followed by the responding police when they.

Was that policy or aspect of the manual in place in twenty fourteen, yes, alright in your view, then was that policy followed by the responding police when they.

First No, no, it wasn't.

First No, no, it wasn't.

What emissions do you note if.

What emissions do you note if.

I go to the policy? Yes, so verifying the scene, the position of the body. If further and I will go on weapon locations are consistent with the method in which the death has occurred, and further advice or specialist assistance is required to make this determination contact forensic or ballistics or forensic field operations. There's a number of other but that's the fundamental.

I go to the policy? Yes, so verifying the scene, the position of the body. If further and I will go on weapon locations are consistent with the method in which the death has occurred, and further advice or specialist assistance is required to make this determination contact forensic or ballistics or forensic field operations. There's a number of other but that's the fundamental.