Networked Knowledge - Law Report

This version of the report has been prepared by: Dr Robert N Moles
Underlining where it occurs is for editorial emphasis]

South Australia homepage
Go to: A state of Injustice - table of contents
Go to: Losing Their Grip - The Case of Henry Keogh - table of contents

On 8 August 2008 891 ABC radio on comments by Stephen Pallaras DPP on the Tom Easling case

Iain Evans, Shadow Minister for Social Inclusion

Concern about comments made by Stephen Pallaras Director of Public Prosecutions in a previous interview - Tom Easling case

David Bevan: If you were listening on Monday you would have heard an extraordinary interview with Stephen Pallaras. We were talking to him about the Tom Easling case. Tom Easling was charged with a series of sex offences against I think it was eight different children that he had fostered over many years. All of the counts were thrown out by the jury, he was found not guilty on every single count. His lawyer, Lindy Powell, has raised a number of concerns about the way the investigation was carried out by officers within the Families Department by their Special Investigations Unit. Criticism wasn’t so much about the DPP or about the police, but about the way the SIU within the Families Department managed the case. Stephen Pallaras was on our program and he defended the way that case had been investigated and prosecuted. Iain Evans was listening very closely. He’s the Member for Davenport and Tom Easling is one of his constituents. Iain Evans won’t let the matter rest, good morning Iain Evans. When you heard Stephen Pallaras a number of things concerned you, you’re now taking them up with the Attorney-General, what are they?

Iain Evans: There’s a number of discrepancies between what Mr Pallaras said on your program on Monday and what actually appears in the court transcript, let me give you just one example - Mr Pallaras makes comment to the effect that one of the witnesses was not available for interview, didn’t get home until about 5 o’clock, at that point he was interviewed, the tape recorder was turned on and he was interviewed at that time. You go to the court transcripts, that witness says that he was home at 3 o’clock, the investigators rolled up and 3 o’clock, he let them in, they sat down and talked between 3 and 4.30, the tape recorder was off between 3 and 4.30. An hour and a half of discussions with the investigators that is not recorded. During that time they talked about Tom Easling, they talked about sexual abuse, they talked about massage, alcohol, cigarettes and Kangaroo Island, all things that were central to the case.

David Bevan: What you say is important is that, and Lindy Powell said this was important, that we need to know what was said during that hour and a half. Stephen Pallaras told our listeners nothing was said because there was no contact between the investigators and the witness during that time. The court transcript shows there was.

Iain Evans: That’s right. What I’m saying to the Attorney-General, he’s got the court transcript, go and read the court transcript and come out and say whether what Mr Pallaras said is actually accurate because on my reading of the court transcript that is clearly not what the witness said. The witness said that he was home, he was interviewed for an hour and a half while the tape recorder was off and they did discuss the case. My point to the Attorney is, go and read the transcript and tell the public which is the accurate statement because I have some serious concerns about what the DPP said on Monday. There are a number of other things, David, I’ll be taking up with the Attorney-General, other discrepancies in the transcript of what the DPP said on Monday, I think are errors.

David Bevan: Now, you want an independent inquiry into the way Tom Easling’s case was investigated. The Government has asked the DPP to look into it. Stephen Pallaras says this is entirely appropriate. You continue to push for an independent inquiry and you say this is one of the reasons.

Iain Evans: Well absolutely. I make the point to your listeners that my main target in this is the investigation, as with Lindy Powell with her comments - our main target is the quality of the investigation. A side issue, but an important issue, is the fact that the DPP’s office ran the prosecution, therefore our view is the Government shouldn’t be getting advice from the DPP on the issue. It needs an independent set of eyes to look at this matter. When you have the DPP come out and make comments that appear to be contradictory to what the transcripts say, that just raises the concerns. I think this illustrates why you need an independent inquiry.

David Bevan: Stephen Pallaras also sent a very clear warning to you, Iain Evans, to be careful about going into bat for Tom Easling.

Iain Evans: Well look, Tom Easling went to court, the Government threw everything at him and the court found him not guilty. Iain Evans’ role as an MP is not to second guess the courts, Iain Evans’ role as an MP is to represent my constituents. My constituent says the investigation was poor, my reading of the transcript was the investigation was terrible. I’m bringing it to the attention of the Government because the next investigation, future investigations should be of a far greater quality than the one dished out to Mr Easling.

David Bevan: Are you going to back off?

Iain Evans: No, absolutely I’m not backing off. David, I suspect there’ll be other MPs coming out supporting me and Mr Easling in the call for an independent inquiry over the next few weeks.

David Bevan: Iain Evans, thanks for talking to us. We’re more than happy again to talk to Stephen Pallaras, Lindy Powell and the Attorney-General. Waiting to still hear from the Attorney-General, although I think he’s due to come into the studio next week, so we can raise these matters with Michael Atkinson then.

Top of Page