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.
No comments:
Post a Comment