Day 10. Findings

 Today we are presented by Deputy state Coroner Hugh Dillon with his findings.

The findings are unsurprising to anyone who has been in court for the last 9 days. A précis of his findings are as follows.

Jai Morcom died of a basial subarachnoid haemorrhage on the morning of 28 August 2009 during an altercation in the schoolyard of Mullumbimby High School. No evidence has been seen to show he was bashed to death or murdered by any person or group. How the Subarachnoid haemorrhage was brought on about is inconclusive.

Deputy state coroner findings were presented with great detail and untold compassion for the family and friends of Jai. I have been in this inquest from day one and quite frankly it could not have been more thorough and methodical in its investigation. It is no small wonder that it has taken a year and six months to reach this point.

Hugh Dillon pointed out that one has to remember around thirty people were present in a sudden fast moving quickly changing event that lasted between 30 seconds and a minute. People will see and recall things in rapid fragments that when after the event and a degree of conversation cross referencing has taken place, (it is not possible to isolate thirty people from each other in the aftermath) confusion sets in over the sequence of fragments, the identity of people in those fragments and confusion over what they saw to happen and what they heard had happened. This has led to many of the testimonies being inconsistent and not possible to corroborate accurately into cogent reliable evidence. 

When a child dies you want answers, and if it is in traumatic circumstances you most certainly want someone to be held to account. As I have said in this Blog on many occasions the truth is an evasive creature, it is sometimes evasive because someone has hidden it and sometimes it’s evasive because it is simply indistinct. This inquest has shown that no one has tried to hide the truth, with an investigation team of this magnitude it would have been dug up with little effort. The sad fact is, this ‘truth’ is evasive because it is too indistinct to isolate and sometimes that is the hardest and most bitter pill to swallow.

Outside the court Steve Drummond expressed his disappointment and said he was considering his options

DAY 9 sufferance of truth

This is the day we heard from the final witness a pupil whom I shall refer to as ‘Boy 1’. His testimony is crucial since he was at the epicentre of the brawl and also at together with ‘second punch’ has been at the epicentre of gossip and rumour as the primary antagonists. Boy 1 took the witness stand for a grueling 2 hours and 45 minutes with out a break. Michael Wigney went over his testimony with a fine toothcomb covering the fight from wo to go to stop in a manner that was as steady as it was methodical. Boy 1 was consistent in his version of events and pointed out various discrepancies within the police transcript that he corrected. All the time his father stood by the door watching tense and stressed his eyes constantly darting around the court room. Despite the constant and steady flow of questions and clarifications Boy1 was never fazed irritated of angry. In fact this seems to have been a common factor in all the pupil witness’s, I never saw a witness show stress animosity anger or malice to either the situation or any other witness. Also boy 1 claimed he only ever tried to break up the fight and this was the only piece of evidence that was corroborated across the board without equivocation.

After this marathon there was a short break and we reconvened after fifteen minutes to hear submissions from first a submission written by Kim Morcom and read by Michael Wigney, followed by a submission read by Steve Drummond, I shall say no more other than both statement were utterly heart breaking. Particularly Steve as the only way he could maintain composure was to read as fast as possible. One other piece of evidence was consistent all the way through the case and that was of Jai’s character of the most joyous loving fresh positive non-aggressive peacemaker that ever graced the earth.

We broke for a short lunch and returned to listen to the Coroners assistant make his submission. It was absolutely as we all expected, the medical evidence was inconclusive in the manner of but not in moment of the subarachnoid haemorrhage that killed Jai. It would have been fast and from the moment of rupture he had only moments before collapse and unconsciousness would follow. Those moments were when he struck the wall and slid down and lay unconscious, evidence that he struck the wall violently is in contradiction to other evidence that says he stumbled into the wall and slid down. No evidence places a person or persons placing a blow on Jai in those preceding moments.

Michael Wigney went to great pains and detail to explain the medical and oral testimonies. He revealed in great detail how many of the testimonies had inconsistencies that rendered them non cogent and unreliable. We have to remember it is does not mean that some of these things did not happen, it means we cannot show them to have actually taken place and this is the nature of truth, it can be a very evasive beast. In our democratic judicial system we do not imagine the truth, we do not speculate the truth, we do not fabricate the truth, we d not assume the truth. With all means at our disposal we reveal as much of it to be correct as is humanly possible. In some cases those revelations will never be enough to tell us what actually happened. All through Michael Wigneys submission I watched it the reality of the facts revealed wash down on Steve like a tropical fall of rain. The truth of the version of events he had held on to and sought vindication of, before this inquest, was washed away in the slow motion flash flood that was this most correct and methodical of inquests. After Michael Wigney finished Steve Drummond stood emotionally naked in the middle of the court and bid Hugh Dillon thanks and stated that he would stand by his findings. After a brief commendation of his conduct by the deputy Coroner, Steve Drummond left the court he was drawn and tired with sunken eyes but he held the dignity of a mountain; a braver man I have yet to witness.

In the reflection of the loss of my own children, I still could not find words that would remotely comfort Steve or Jai’s mother. The loss of a child is the greatest tragedy that can befall a human being. Sadness moves into the body and it never leaves; the yearning for their presence is always lurking in some moment somewhere. When you loose a child you never recover, but you do with time learn to live with it.

Day 8 the patience of truth.

 

Another morning of peripheral witness’s whose testimony is haphazard hazy and inconsistent with other testimonies. There is some hope when one witness names name’s of those giving and receiving punches with refreshing accuracy, however under minute cross examination from Michael Wigney it is quickly revealed that many of the names were learnt after the event and not known before.

A short lunch is called and after this adjournment we will hear the testimony of ‘second punch’ who being a central antagonist is eagerly waited by many. We are all however reminded, by Deputy State Coroner Hugh Dillon, in no uncertain terms of the stop publication order of identifying any Mullumbimby high school pupil past or present, involved in this case.

All through this case Deputy State Coroner Hugh Dillon has lead the proceedings with an extraordinary authority based on calm humanity with a humility and central strength that demands immediate respect. He has been strong where strength was needed and human where humanity was required; remembering, this is a case with many young people involved who have never confronted the judiciary before and thankfully probably never will again. Deputy State Coroner Hugh Dillon is also given ample assistance from an imposing seat above which is the royal crest of justice and beneath him sits the court clerk who is an imposing female figure who will clearly take no nonsense from anyone who even dreams of the act of court contempt.

So it was very interesting with this very imposing judicial figure in mind that when I went for lunch and trawled Woodlark street for a digestible sandwich. Suddenly I noticed Deputy State Coroner Hugh Dillon doing said same thing, all five feet 8 inches of him with a waist of 29 inches and the build of a matchstick with the wood shaved off. The strength and ability of this man is totally internal and my goodness we need more of them.

After Lunch ‘second punch’ gives his evidence, but even after two hours of questions and persistent cross-examination, with some interesting inconsistencies, his testimony sheds little new light on the event. From his point of view he put his head down and fought for his own safety, the net result being, he says, he neither saw whom he hit or vice versa.

Day 7 tears on the horizon

Today was a more sombre day for reasons of utter inconsequence. Another stream of young kids came through giving their evidence, some of whom were only 11 years old at the time. Again the memories have faded and the pupil’s cognitive knowledge of the pupils and teachers of the large school was frighteningly absent. This I felt was a damming indictment of a modern school where the pupils outside their own immediate space have little knowledge of the people around them. It made me realise that the good old-fashioned assembly every morning was a valuable exercise in inter pupil and teacher recognition if nothing else. ‘Second punch’s’ Girl friend gave her evidence, which was quite indistinct and inconclusive as was all the other pupils’ evidence really. If they could remember someone’s name they could not remember if they saw them hit anyone, if they saw someone hit some one they could not remember whom it was or what year they were. There are many pieces to this puzzle but whilst the pattern is getting clear the main picture is still yet to emerge. There are two very sad things that have become apparent. So far in 7 days of questioning when ever anyone is asked about Jai’s character, across the board without equivocation a picture is painted of a most kind generous loving smiling soul that every lived. One Girl stated that all the friends she has to day in the school are the result of Jai’s love and generosity when she first came to the school scared and alone.

The other thing was, it has been reported but I was unaware, was that ‘Second punch’ and his girl friend, who are 19 and 18, had a baby together not 5 months ago. Outside the court ‘second punch’, who is possibly in a precarious position having been positively identified delivering some savage blows to Jai, I watched him as he held and caressed his small offspring in a genuinely soft and caring manner, it was indeed quite heart breaking.

Day 6. Medical experts.

Today the search for what happened, or the truth we crave, gets technical and the medical expert witness’s are brought in.

The session begins in a sombre mood as the deputy state coroner reminds the court that medical evidence can be very distressing for those who were close to the deceased. Steve Drummond is given every opportunity to excuse himself but he opts to stay and pose his questions.

The medical experts enter, 4 of them three women one man. Three are neuron & anatomical pathologists, the remaining is a Neuro surgeon, or a brain surgeon in lay language. I have to say this aspect of this inquest I was ready to experience something very harrowing and intensely emotional, in fact it rapidly descended into something verging on farce! The three pathologists 2 female 1 male really looked like they had crawled off the slab and got dressed, the brain surgeon actually looked quite alive which was a relief. Immediately Michael Wingney found a major discrepancy in their statistical analysis. This was a bit of a surprise a doctors are notorious for standing shoulder to shoulder in everything except blame. One of the pathologists pointed out that the discrepancy was due to the fact that the brain surgeon dealt only with live patients where as pathologists dealt only with dead ones, it really is too simple sometimes isn’t it. Now at this point I have to bring the worlds attention to one particular fact, God may have endowed these people with extraordinary incite intelligence and manual ability but he did not endow them with vocal chords sufficient for the average 19 century court room.

Over the next five hours I craned my ears to hear every word they said and all of it lengthy medical terminology of which I had no known point of reference. It was like finding myself reporting a trial in Iran with no interpreter. There were endless discussions on Aneurisms, sub arachnoid haemorrhages, vertical arterial tears. What type are there, those spontaneous (just happen due to congenital abnormality) those caused by trauma, (blow to the head). What happens what are the signs in pre-existing conditions? It went on and on in a series of totally frustrating mumbles and whispers. Having said that what was very clear was that all you boys who happen to fancy a bit of biff after a beer on a Saturday night, be warned! One punch in the right place at really quite a low velocity can have fatal consequences.

The reason I have been so flip on this piece is that at the end of the day these experts did not leave any stone unturned telling us the exact details of how death by sub-arachnoid haemorrhage comes about. They covered its speed its velocity, its type, its induction, its pre-existing conditions, symptoms and ability to leave little trace of actual rupture. They described the action of a punches rotational hyper-extending blow, fast, slow, dull or sharp in sickeningly minute detail! But what they could not do, was tell the court was how it happened in this particular case; in fact it rapidly looked as though there wa s no chance of an answer unless the cranium contained an indentation into which a 5-dollar axe from Bunnings would fit with suspicious neatness.

DAY 5 Peripheral vision

Yesterday the witness’s were foggy with an idea of pupil movement, in and around the fight, which figures moved where, who threw punches, which figures did not, it is all frustratingly indistinct with indistinct memories still indistinct and good memories withdrawn. Nevertheless a pattern of activity and ‘person’ movements appearing in the crucial areas of ‘Jai’ is emerging but there is little cognitive recognition that includes specific names.

I arrive on Friday expecting more of the same and less drama due to the fact that even though Steve Drummond did not actually contravene any laws or court orders the previous day, he was clearly minding his step every inch of the way.

The first witness, a young mousy boy on the periphery of the fight watching it by standing on a table. I am tired, having had a late night the nigh before do not pay attention, till! The witness names a specific boy punching Jai. Now, so far we have heard many witness’s say Jai was punched but not by whom.

This is the first witness to place a name to someone who punched Jai repeatedly. More interestingly when Michael Wigney asks the boy, if his original statement is accurate and does he still remember it? He is quite adamant he does, and there is nothing he wants to add or change. The boy who punched Jai I shall call ‘second punch’ because it is he who was originally punched by ‘first punch’. (Earlier in blog)

‘Second punch’ sits in the jury area as he has done all week were he has taken many notes, but now he sits impassively.

Two more witness come to the stand, they are more central to the action and like others their recollections are no patch and hazy. One of the witness’s clearly had great affection for Jai and the event clearly took a massive emotional toll on him and it would appear to continue to do so. He does have crucial evidence about Jai’s demeanour after being hit repeatedly by someone he was not able to recognise.

After lunch there was another witness from a peripheral vision of non-combatants A goofy kid with a strange hair cut jeans and checked shirt, he looked in awe of the proceedings but none the less focused. Due to the fact that many witness’s mumbled in that oh so wonderful way adolescents do, Deputy Sate Coroner asked him to keep his voice up so the court could hear. He needn’t have asked, the boy has a crisp clear voice of ample volume and proceeded to take questions in verbatim with responses accordingly. As he did with others, in search of compromised statements, Michael Wigney asks what he did after the fight, he went to his class, did he leave is class for any reason, yes, why did he leave class? I went to the toilet, is the reply. This produced a smirk of humour from counsel but once Wigney had established the boy’s statement was still a fair and full account of what he saw, Michael Wigney read a summary of the statement and any humour evaporated. The nub of the statement was that this witness saw ‘second punch’ punch Jai repeatedly on the back of the head very hard 4 or 5 times whilst Jai lay face down on the ground.

This is the second witness to actually recognise and name someone repeatedly punching Jai and the same person as the first witness to name someone punching Jai.

This revelation came in the few minutes after the start of the post lunch session. For the next one and a half hours Michael Wigney questioned this boy over his statement in the most microscopic detail, again and again and again pinning down what he saw how could he be sure? This boy had not recanted anything of his statement he was adamant what he said in his original statement was a full and truthful account of what he saw. This is a schoolboy yet he faced this intense questioning and cross-examination with forthright calmness never being phased irritated or harried into changing his account. He stuck by what he saw, and said so again and again without flaw elaboration or embroidering. At one point he did sigh with tiredness and then threw a worried glance at ‘Second punch’ who looked at him back.

At one point the questioning was so intense and detailed my colleague whispered to me, ‘Is he trying to discredit him?’.

I whispered back, ‘no I think it is the opposite’.

It was my assessment that the evidence this boy gave was so serious and could indeed show a serious offence had been committed, that Michael Wigney was not going to risk there being any flaw in it that could be opened up at a later date, consequently a myopic approach to this testimony, which no other witness got.

At the end of the day I have to salute the witness for integrity way beyond his years and for a professionalism correctly weighed against necessary humanity in Michael Wigney.

DAY 4 More kids & some admonishment.

 

Day 4 started with the Deputy state Coroner Hugh Dillon admonishing Steve Drummond for a quote, that appeared in the Sydney morning Herald that morning and attributed to him. The quote was possibly detrimental to Mullum High school and though Steve Drummond maintained the quote was not only taken out of context but also misquoted, the Deputy State Coroner still gave him a stern warning and also to anyone making posts on My space, facebook or any other social networking sites.

The morning continued with Pupils at the epicentre of the fight giving their evidence, and interestingly once the contents of their statements had been brought to their attention most of them stated aspects of their statements were wrong, incorrect or in some instances contained things that they now did not remember happening at all.

Indeed some pupils used terms like ‘my head was in a weird space at that time’

Others however used efficient answers like ‘I don’t recall that’ or ‘I have no recollection’ or simply ‘I do not remember’.

Michael Wigney the deputy coroner‘s assistant was very thorough in finding which statements may have been compromised by inter-pupil chat before they were actually made. Indeed he was also very thorough in pinning down what parts of statements were stood by and which were not. In many ways it was a frustrating day for the truth as the misty fog of fading memories fought for domination over, what was seen to happen, and what was, overheard to have happened.  However in this inquest Michael Wigney is indeed impressive, he stands for the entire day, questioning the witness’s in every tiny detail, his vocal chords must have the stamina of David Beckhams legs. Any actor or teacher will tell you how strenuous it is talking all day, and especially when there is great repetition of what is being said, with full names being used at all times. Michael Wigney’s stamina clarity focus and thoroughness over these long sessions are indeed impressive.

After the morning adjournment Steve Drummond was asked by the deputy coroner to approach the bar. When he did so he was told he was overheard saying some thing outside the court and the Deputy state Coroner asked if he had said, ‘you murdered my son’ to one of the state witness’s. The surprise on Steve’s face at this allegation was as clear as day and he categorically denied saying any such thing. The judge accepted this with reservation, in that he did say two people heard it and he gave Steve a stern warning that if anything did happen like this he could be facing charges from the Supreme Court.

With these events I become very conscious of what I am writing, I double-check, have I inadvertently put a boys name in my blog? Is what I am writing innuendo or rumour? Suddenly the simple act of saying or writing something that is in my mind puts me in a situation where I can come face to face with the legal system. After all, to break into a house and steal something is a journey with many possible pauses for reconsideration before a crime is committed. Writing what is in your mind is a shorter journey with fewer pauses, for reconsideration. Speaking your mind is a shorter journey still, with no pauses for reconsideration.

In Steve Drummond situation this appears to have been a miss interpretation of Steve shouting at a journalist for whose copy he did not care. At one point he shouted, ‘I don’t like the way you portrayed my son!

The irony in this particular moment where Steve Drummond was admonished for a second time, was that I and one other journalist were the only writers in the public gallery and we both wrote it down quite differently.

The afternoon Continued and the witness tally starts to fall behind Schedule, we are starting to here from more peripheral witness’s and it is interesting because it would appear the closer to the fight a witness was (physically & emotionally) the less they seem to have seen or remember seeing.

Day 3 The Kids

On this day we have the testimony of some of the pupils at the centre of this tragic event. For legal reasons I cannot name any of them, but there are two groups, the year 9 pupils and the year 11 pupils.

The situation, which is undisputed, is that the year 9 pupils took an alloy table from the area used by year 11 pupils and set it up in their preferred spot under a stair well. Year 11 pupils come to retrieve the table but year nine pupils hang on to it by sitting on it (including Jai). The largest of the year 11 pupils tips it and squashes the year 9 pupils against the wall and one falls on the floor. There is some aggression as the table is dragged away, but a teacher intervenes and the table dispute is settled with year 11 pupils taking possession. One of the year 9 pupils spits on a year 11 pupil. The year 11 pupil does not see who did it nor does the teacher, but none the less she asks if the year 11 pupil wishes to make a charge, the pupil declines, the parties separate and the teachers, under the impression the dispute is settled and defused, also depart.

The year 11 pupils are incensed still and return for an apology. They confront the year 9 pupils, but no apology is forthcoming, two pupils trade punches, a fight ensues and escalates ending with Jai unconscious on the ground.

The question is, and what the inquest is about, is how did Jai end up on the ground in that condition.

The first pupil is quite an eloquent witness, confident and self-assured, and it is quite clear he threw the first punch.

But during a lot of questions about location, sequence of events, what was seen was not seen, some thing started to bother me.

Up to this time we have heard Jai described in totally unequivocal terms by all that knew him. Peaceful, fun kid, kind heart, good soul, not aggressive, not a bully and certainly not a victim, they all said. In fact he came over as the very epitome of a rainbow region chilled out dude, and not the kind to dive into a fight in the first wave. But he did, and without even discarding his back pack, not the action of a seasoned biff boy. I wanted to know why? The Ozzie tradition of sticking up for your mates was not good enough, this had something else. And it soon it arrived.

The pupil who threw the first punch, described Jai thus: (with a glowing smile of great affection coming over his face)

‘Jai was a great kid, he taught me so much about me, how to be true to my self and get on with myself, I never met a kid like him and probably never will again in my life.’ He said other complimentary things but this struck me very deep.

This to me suggests there is a close relationship between a Pupil at peace with himself (Jai) and another (first punch) who was not and found life difficult, Jai helped him and they had a particular bond which led Jai to enter the fray as soon as the fight started to protect his friend, from others and himself.

But none of this is a fact and facts is what the enquiry needs. So infinitely they continue to search; discussing table disputes, locations, motion, travel speed and spitting incidents, (which was clearly the catalyst to the violence). Some of the pupils are good witnesses some poor, ineloquent and fuzzy in memory and comprehension. Others are nervous uncomfortable, one is really way too casual for his own good. In the story, repeatedly the peaceful Jai enters the fray till it seems pupils (to give evidence) forcibly ejected him in a rough manner. Why did he do this, why did he keep entering the fray, it is the one question that does not match his profile.

DAY 2 Teachers and possibilities.

Today the teachers and staff gave their evidence and this blog is evolving as I write, I do not want it to be a blow-by-blow account of what was submitted in the court. What I want is to observe how we as humans arrive at the truth of events that have past into time. 

 This is interesting in history and in common political journalism but when lives have been lost and other lives and reputations are in jeopardy, suddenly gravity enters the arena and it is important to find, view and present the facts as thoroughly as is humanly possible.

In this case it is only the second day and I have heard ‘Its possible’ or ‘I have no recollection’ a lot. These answers seem to be the most useful answers to the fog of truth, and it is a fog. Driving in the fog of the Corndale flats is something I have done many times, the road is there, I know it’s there and its straight. But I cannot see it, but its there and I do know its straight, why do I slow down? Because I still know there are many variables and consequently knowing is not good enough, so I drive slow and take in every tiny detail of data as I go. Surprise! I get home safe.

Witness are there they do not know in advance that two years hence they will be ordered to a court to give account of a particular event at a particular time.

The advantage here is the witnesses in this situation at this time are in fact teachers in a school, which has a policy of how to deal with, and record events such as schoolyard brawls.

The teachers give evidence in a professional succinct manner that is beneficial to the proceedings. The casual teacher new to teaching is clear in what she saw and what she did not, the deputy principal is likewise but becomes slightly emotional when pressed by Steve Drummond as to who released the information that Jai’s condition was not survivable, his answer was in the negative. The head teacher was equally on top of what she new and did not. The school administrator was utterly factual and to the point.

But now arrives a human problem, one teacher, a young female is one of the first at the scene and so her position is crucial. Her testimony is plagued by unease inconstancy and confusion. Her ability to observe recollect interpret repeat and articulate facts appears very weak, she seems nervous and any question too lengthy has to be repeated for her. She answers many times in visual gestures, she maintains many facts came back to her later but did not contact the police. Vital statements that the court were not aware of she has left in her car. When she found herself in a casual conversation about the events and illegally recorded, did she re-contact police and make further statements.

Now it is very important that readers of this blog do not think I am bagging this woman I am not. She is clearly competent as a teacher or she would not be employed as such. However her personality seems a bit arty hither and thither a very visual thinker, which all makes her a clearly lovable and attractive person, surely emphasised by the fact she is 8 moths pregnant. However as a witness, she has a lot be desired and is not benefiting the pursuit of the truth in many ways she has frustrated it. But we must remember, in life witnesses to tragic vents such as these are not chosen and short-listed, they happen.

Jai Morcoms inquest DAY 1

This is the first day of the inquest, I walk up the hill to Lismore court house as the sun rises and silhouettes the array of camera tripods erected by freshly arrived media. I am security checked by the court staff and on the board I see that the coroner's inquest will be in court 3, so upstairs I trundle and wait patiently outside. Various people arrive,three smart looking hackettes from 7, 9 and prime, legal counsel identified by large suitcases on wheels that would not pass muster as hand baggage on a long haul fright, and then interested parties, which seems to be the euphemism for families of the deceased. Very soon we all enter the court room and wait. I see Steve Drummond he looks tired and strained but none the less composed and focused, I feel for him as he sits alone in front of the court waiting. To loose a child is one thing but to pursue justice for that child yourself must be very hard to do and still remain detached and focused enough to chase the answers.

The presiding magistrate enters and the proceedings get underway the first thing explained by the presiding magistrate is that the inquest is inquisitorial and not adversarial it is not about who is to blame for Jai's death it is how did he die.
Much is made of the scurrilous conjecture, rumour, uninformed opinion, and gossip that has surrounded this case and it is noted that it will not be pursued or allowed in these proceedings.
The opening statement is made by the coroner, (I think) the reason I say think is because the sound in the court is so dead I can barely hear. This opening statement involves mapping out of the sequence of events that lead to the event the event it self and what happened immediately after. The Coroner states that he will produce evidences to support  the fact that events happened as he described them.
This is all very interesting, given that in today's society of quick sound bites, fractional spin instant gratification and fast sensation. Sitting through a statement of one and a half hours is indeed in need of attention, education, stamina and concentration. The passage of truth it would seem is slow and involved, which I do indeed find refreshing.
The story can be summarised as this, there were two parties, year 9 pupils and year 11 pupils, there was an ongoing dispute over an alloy table used to eat lunch on by both parties in different locations of the school yard. This particular day the year 9 boys had on their patch and the year 11 boys and took it back to their patch. An altercation took place but not started by Jai but he did become involved and the altercation extended and after a fight of about 30-60 seconds Jai ended up launched against a wall where he collapsed on the ground incapacitated by a subarachnoid hemorrhage. The question the Coroner wants to answer is, was the subarachnoid hemorrhage spontaneous or was it traumatic. 
Was the hemorrhage from violence or natural causes?
After morning recess the Detective Sargent in charge of the investigation gives his evidence. The evidence presented is from a Detective with 21 years in the force, he  cool calm and answers questions put to him in a dispassionate manner. Everything seems to be going to plan, the evidence is inconclusive, & witness statements we are told vary widely in fact so widely that no charges could be laid individually or combined. This is until questions are put to the officer by Steve Drummond. Steve clearly has a difference of opinion over witness statements but sadly is lack of experience and knowledge of these proceedings is holding him back. It seems like it suddenly looks like he is on the footie field with Tim Cahill, he is not in their league, they do this every day they are all hard core pro's. As a result Steve's  assertion that there are 4 witness statements regarding 'the fatal wall strike' that do not actually vary widely, is lost in a redirection by the magistrate and lack of exponential tenacity by Steve. Steve clearly takes a different view to evidence than the investigators and here his lack of experience and professional standing stops him from challenging the evidence effectively. it puts him at a disadvantage in the court room that is quite palpable.


I have only lightly brushed over what was submitted in the no3 court today and in this blog I am really trying to get a look at how the system functions when trying to get at the truth. It is a hard slow & cumbersome system that unless worked by first class players the ordinary man has little chance.

Jai Morcoms inquest

The inquest into the death of Jai Morcom in the Mullumbimby High school, school yard is to be held next week in Lismore.

I am not a journalist, though I see myself as a writer but it is my intention to attend the inquest and write this blog about what I observe. I met Jai's father during his quest for justice when he was having a signature drive at Mullum Satrurday Market . We talked at length, as he did with many people, and I found him a deeply impressive man and since having lost my own children, I had a degree of connection, though mine were much younger, and not in such a senseless circumstance. As human beings we spend much of our lives looking for answers, big answers, small answers, significant answers and insignificant answers but nonetheless answers. Consequently I feel compelled to attend the inquest and see how we as humans organize ourselves to find the answers and try to make sense of this whole tragic and senseless event.

There will probably be quite a media scrum so I will arrive early but I may well not be able to gain entry, so this blog may not happen at all, but I shall try.

Due to the emotionally charged nature of this event, I expect there may be some people who will want to respond to this blog in quite a free and reactive manner.

All I ask is that people respond with the love dignity and respect for the right 'to be' that has driven me to write this blog in the first place.