transcript 21 april 2017 web viewso you see there, under the word definitions, ... sight and...

AUSCRIPT AUSTRALASIA PTY LIMITEDACN 110 028 825

T: 1800 AUSCRIPT (1800 287 274)E: [email protected]: www.auscript.com.au

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

O/N H-772903

THE HONOURABLE M. WHITE AO, CommissionerMR M. GOODA, Commissioner

IN THE MATTER OF A ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THE CHILD PROTECTION AND YOUTH DETENTION SYSTEMS OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY

DARWIN

10.13 AM, FRIDAY, 21 APRIL 2017

Continued from 20.4.17

DAY 29

MR P.J. CALLAGHAN SC appears with MR P. MORRISSEY SC, MR T. McAVOY SC, MR B. DIGHTON, MS V. BOSNJAK, MR T. GOODWIN and MS S. McGEE as Counsel AssistingMS S. BROWNHILL appears with MR G. O’MAHONEY and MR C. JACOBI for the Northern Territory of AustraliaMR P. O’BRIEN appears with MS C. GOODHAND and MR D. INDEVAR for Dylan VollerMR P. BOULTEN SC appears with DR P. DWYER for North Australian Aboriginal Justice AgencyMS F. GRAHAM appears for the Central Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid ServiceMR A. LEWIN appears for Barrie CleeMR G. O’BRIEN-HARTCHER appears for AGMR J. TIPPETT QC appears for Ken MiddlebrookMS KATHRAKIS appears for Lisa Coon

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2688©Commonwealth of Australia

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

MR CALLAGHAN: I call Ashley Morton.

<ASHLEY MORTON, AFFIRMED [10.15 am]

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR CALLAGHAN

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you. Would you kindly be seated, Mr Morton.

MR CALLAGHAN: May you tell the Commission your full name, please?---Ashley Morton.

Mr Morton, you’ve prepared two statements for the purposes of the Commission; is that correct?---Yes.

One is dated 30 January 2017. You have that one there?---Yes.

Yes. I tender that.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you. We’re at 302, thank you.

EXHIBIT #302 STATEMENT OF ASHLEY MORTON DATED 30/01/2017

MR CALLAGHAN: And the other statement Mr Morton is dated 20 April 2017; is that correct?---Yes.

Yes. I tender that statement.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Exhibit 305.


MR CALLAGHAN: Mr Morton, the evidence you give concerns an incident on 4 October 2011; is that right?---Yes.

And in your first statement, the 30 January one, you make reference to Dylan Voller’s intensive management plan. You’re aware of that?---Yes.

Can you just tell me, was that plan ever actually looked at on 4 October 2011?---It was my understanding that it was in place at the time.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2689 A. MORTON XN©Commonwealth of Australia MR CALLAGHAN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

No. Was it ever looked at? Did anyone ever actually look at it?---I was made aware of it.

MS BROWNHILL: I object to that question. The witness can only attest to his own looking at the document, not anyone else’s.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Well, that could be a bit broader, but try and confine it. Thanks, Mr - - -

MR CALLAGHAN: First, did you look at it?---I was made aware of it.

How were you made aware of it?---I was told of it.

Who told you?---Management, OIC at the time.

Who was that?---It was OIC Tasker.

And - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Who was that, Mr Morton?---OIC Tasker.

Tasker, thank you.

MR CALLAGHAN: And were you aware, by any means, of whether he actually looked at it on that day?---I do not know if he looked at it on that day.

Alright. Thank you. That’s all I have.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Ms Goodhand.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GOODHAND [10.18 am]

MS GOODHAND: Mr Morton, I represent Dylan Voller. I’m going to ask you some questions about your statement of 30 January 2017. So in that statement, do you have that statement there. You were just asked some questions about the IMP that’s attached as annexure B?---Yes.

When you prepared this statement, the 30 January statement, did you have access to documents to prepare that statement?---No. The documents were all provided to me by the SFNT.

Okay. Now, in relation to IMPs – you know what I’m talking about when I say IMP?---Yes.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2690 A. MORTON XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MS GOODHAND

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Are you familiar with the directive 2.4.5? If exhibit 204.OO1 could be shown to the witness on the screen. You see that’s an intensive management plan, it’s a directive 2.4.5?---Yes.

And the issue date is 31 August 2011?---Yes.

And I would like you to assume that that directive was in place at the date of the incident concerning my client on 4 October 2011?---I was shown a different one.

I’m asking you to assume that it was in place?---Okay.

So that I would like you to assume that that directive covered IMPs at that time?---Yes.

Okay. Can I take you to 3.0 on that exhibit. So you see there, under the word Definitions, Intensive Management Plan. You’ve read that?---Yes.

And that’s the type of intensive management plan that you’re referring to by annexure B?---Yes.

Now, if I could take to you page 2 of that exhibit, in particular paragraphs 5(a) to D. If you would like to read those. So on this particular day, by isolating my client, am I correct in saying that you were isolating him under a regime – the regime described in 5(a)?---I – I was following instructions.

And if I can take to you 5.2, can you see there – have you read 5.2, sorry?---Yes.

And you would accept, wouldn’t you, that particularly in the first sentence at 5.2 that it says:

Prior to any of the above regimes being enforced, the IMP needs to be in place.

Would you accept that?---Yes.

So that it was important, by placing my client in isolation, that the IMP needed to be in place beforehand?---He was placed in there because I was given instruction by the IOC at the time.

Now, if I can take you to annexure B, if that can be shown to the witness on the screen, do you see there the commencement date is 9 March 2011. Do you see that?---Yes.

And the review date is 5 April 2011?---Yes.

And then if you go to the very last page of that document, you will see that it’s dated 9 March 2011?---Yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

To your knowledge, is there any IMP after that date?---To my understanding, this was the one that was in place at the time of the incident.

And you would accept from me that this document on its face would need to be reviewed on 5 April 2011?---Yes.

And that date is before the date that you placed my client in isolation?---Yes.

Were you aware that, under that directive, these management plans, if not otherwise specified in the document, were required to be reviewed every two months?---I was not aware, no.

So I’m asking you to assume that the IMP annexed to your statement was not in place on the day you placed my client in isolation. You understand what I mean by that? I want you to assume that that’s the case for the purpose of my next question?---It’s my understanding that that management plan was in place at the time of the incident.

Okay. So for my question I would like you to – I understand what your answer is, but I would like you to assume it wasn’t in place, and I want to ask you something about, if the IMP was not in place, would you accept that placing a child in isolation is a serious matter?---I was given an instruction by the IOC at the time to place him in the cell.

Did you turn your mind to looking at the IMP before you placed my client in isolation that day, can you say? Did you look for the document before you put him in isolation?---I was following instructions.

Yes .....

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Does that mean that – I take it, Mr Morton, that you didn’t ask Mr Tasker, because I take it he was the officer in charge who gave you those instructions, you didn’t say, “Can I just check the IMP for the current IMP for Dylan Voller”?---Before that incident, there was an incident in the classroom and that’s what I went and told Mr Tasker about, and he had already given me an instruction to go and put him in, in the cell, and I just followed that instruction.

Were you familiar with the directive about IMPs at the time?---Semi familiar.

By – you say fairly familiar?---Yes. It was my understanding that he was on a management plan at the time of the incident.

And did you, yourself, recall what that management plan was when you were obeying Mr Tasker’s direction?---Yes. Well – yes.

You’re familiar with it, were you?---Yes. Well, not a 100 per cent familiar but I was familiar. I knew it existed.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And as far as you were concerned you believed that there was one, a current one in place for him, did you?---Yes.

MS GOODHAND: Thank you, Commissioners. I have nothing further.

MR CALLAGHAN: I have nothing further for Mr Morton. May he be excused.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes.

Thank you for your assistance. You’re released from your summons to the Commission?---Thank you.

Thank you. You can go now.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [10.26 am]

MR CALLAGHAN: Commissioners, the next witness appeared by video link. I understand we need some time to set that up.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Right. We adjourn then. Do we need to adjourn?

MR CALLAGHAN: I’m actually not sure how long we need.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: We do. I’m getting the nod from the technicians. How long do you think we might be, then, with this link?

MR CALLAGHAN: 10 minutes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you. Adjourn for 10. Thanks.

ADJOURNED [10.26 am]

RESUMED [10.47 am]

MR CALLAGHAN: I call Bruce Evans.

<BRUCE EVANS, AFFIRMED [10.48 am]

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes, Mr Callaghan.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2693 B. EVANS ©Commonwealth of Australia

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR CALLAGHAN [10.48 am]

MR CALLAGHAN: Thank you, Commissioners.

Mr Evans, you’ve prepared a statement for the purposes of the Royal Commission; is that correct?---I have.

It’s a statement dated 31 January 2017?---Yes, that’s correct.

I tender that statement.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Exhibit 306.

EXHIBIT #306 STATEMENT OF BRUCE EVANS DATED 31/01/2017

MR CALLAGHAN: You clearly have a copy of that there; is that right?---Yes, I do.

Thank you?---Yes, I do.

The statement concerns the events of 8 March 2015 and the transfer of Mr Dylan Voller from Alice Springs to Tennant Creek; is that correct?---That’s correct.

Can I ask you this at the outset: was Mr Voller handcuffed at the start of the trip from Alice Springs to Tennant Creek?---Yes, he was.

Was the intention that he should remain handcuffed for the entire journey?---Yes, it was.

I take you to paragraph 23 of the statement. At Ti Tree, Mr Voller indicated that he needed to use the toilet. By that stage you would have been travelling for how long?---Approximately 50 minutes.

From Alice Springs to Ti Tree?---That’s correct.

This indication that he gave you was – was taken seriously by you?---Yes, it was.

Because you attempted to let him use the toilet at the police station; is that right?---That’s correct.

When you found that was locked, you made the decision not to let him use any other toilet?---That’s correct.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2694 B. EVANS XN©Commonwealth of Australia MR CALLAGHAN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

You say in paragraph 25, “This was a decision that was not made lightly”?---Yes, that’s correct.

And that’s because it was a decision to deny him a basic human need, and that’s not the sort of decision you make lightly; is that right?---That is correct.

You must have realised at the very least that this decision might have caused him some discomfort?---Yes. I realised that may have caused him some discomfort.

And that brings me to paragraph 28 of your statement where you say that, if Mr Voller did request to use the bathroom again, you did not believe this request to be serious?---Yes.

Do you recognise the absurdity in that remark?---Well, yes. However Mr Voller, due to his threats and swearing and carrying on, may have been trying to get himself out of the back of the vehicle for some reason, which – to which I would not know.

That’s a different proposition from suggesting that you didn’t take any further request – or that you may not have taken any further request seriously. You took the first one seriously, because it was obviously a logical enough sort of a request to make, but you say if any subsequent request was made, it wouldn’t have been taken seriously?---On road escorts – on every road escort I’ve done from Alice Springs to Tennant Creek, we always stop at Ti Tree to utilise the toilets, whether or not the person in custody required to go or not. We gave them that opportunity.

But he had asked to go?---Yes. And I was unable to comply with that wish at that time.

Yes, I understand. But he had asked to go because – well, you must have allowed at least the possibility that he asked to go because he needed to go?---Yeah. If you refer to paragraph 27 we actually allowed Mr Voller to urinate out of the cage in a secluded spot on the Stuart Highway.

I understand that. I’m concerned about the proposition that you’ve already addressed – and I won’t dwell on this – that you didn’t believe any further request ought be taken seriously?---Well, just bear with me one second, while I just read that paragraph again.

Certainly?---As I’ve said in my statement, you know, he was continually swearing, being disruptive throughout the journey, and would often make false complaints in order to get attention. I believed at that time that he was doing that to get attention.

And you didn’t allow for the possibility that he actually might have needed to perform a basic - - -?---No, I did not.

- - - human function?---No, I did not.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2695 B. EVANS XN©Commonwealth of Australia MR CALLAGHAN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And I suggest to you that you didn’t allow for that possibility because you were completely indifferent to his basic human needs?---I don’t believe I was indifferent.

I have nothing further.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes. Thank you.

COMMISSIONER GOODA: Mr Evans, I just want to take you back to your – well, Mr Callaghan’s first questions about the distance between Ti Tree and Alice Springs, you know, it’s 50 minutes. Are you sure that’s 50 minutes, not considerably longer?---I’m pretty sure it’s about 50 minutes.

It’s over 190 kilometres?---I’m not a 100 per cent sure on the distance but I believed it to have been about 50 minutes. I may have been mistaken in that.

Okay. Thank you.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Have you done that trip before?---I have done that trip on escort once before.

Right. Thanks, Ms Goodhand.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GOODHAND [10.55 am]

MS GOODHAND: Thank you, Commissioners.

Mr Evans, my name is Goodhand, and I appear for Dylan Voller. I will just indicate before I start, Commissioners, it’s expected that at the end of the cross-examination there will be some questions that require this to go into a closed court.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thanks, Ms Goodhand.

MS GOODHAND: Do you have a copy of your statement in front of you?---Yes, I do.

You’ve annexed to your statement at annexure 4, if you could go to that, BE4?---Yes, I’ve got that annexure.

So that’s an email from Mr Clee to James Sizeland and other people, and you’re CCed in on that email; is that correct?---That is correct.

And that’s 6 March 2015, so the day before you escorted my client to Tennant Creek?---Yes.

And you’re - - -?---I believe so.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2696 B. EVANS XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MS GOODHAND

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

If I can draw your attention to the last two lines in that email, you will see – can you see those two lines?---Yes.

And you will see there that you’ve got some instructions from Mr Clee in relation to what’s to happen on this particular escort?---That’s correct.

And he’s very clear with you in terms of there being no stops other than a toilet stop at Ti Tree or in an emergency. Do you see that?---Yes, I do.

And those are instructions that you would have taken extremely seriously?---That’s correct.

And in terms of the reference to taking enough refreshments and food, do you take that to be a reference for Mr Voller’s benefit?---That’s correct.

Now, if I can take you back to your statement in paragraph 20, do you have that? So once the escort has started there’s a – shortly after there’s a time when my client started playing up?---Yes.

And he was playing up so much that you felt it necessary to contact the Alice Springs Detention Centre?---That’s correct.

And do I understand that you spoke to someone else, but not Mr Clee personally?---That’s correct.

And the instructions were that you were to continue?---That’s correct.

And that a job would be placed on IOMS?---Yeah. Yeah. That is correct.

Now, if I can take you to BE3 - - -?---Yes.

- - - is it your understanding that that was the job that was created? That was the IOMS - - -?---Yes, that’s - - -

- - - creation?---That was the IOMS job that was created so that any reports could be added to that particular job in relation to this matter.

And do you see at paragraph – the paragraph commencing, “At approximately 0930 hours”? Do you see that?---Yep.

And the person who has completed this document has described the event as occurring at about 9.30 am?---Yes.

And then if you go to BE2, is that the document you created in respect of this escort, the IOMS document?---That would have been my officer’s report.

And that’s a document you created?---That’s a document I would have created, yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And that was a document created by you on 6 April 2015?---Yes.

So that’s approximately one month after the incident occurred?---Approximately, yes.

And if I can draw your attention to paragraph 2 in that document, line 5, do you see the words there in relation to a threat by my client?---One, two, three, four, five – yes.

Now, that’s a pretty serious threat, isn’t it?---That is correct.

And is that something that you raised when you rang the Alice Springs Detention Centre when you contacted them at 9.30?---Yes. I would have contacted them and raised that with them, and also I would have raised that with Mr Clee if I could get him on the phone, which I think I did, but I’m unsure.

And, well, certainly in this document it suggests that Mr Clee then gave you permission to stop the vehicle; that’s right, isn’t it?---Yep.

And to check on - - -?---I believe so, yes.

To check on my client’s welfare?---Yes.

Now, if I can take you back to annexure BE3 - - -?---Yep.

- - - can you see there there’s no reference to those threats?---That’s correct.

So you would agree with me then, based on your evidence, that this annexure BE3 is not completely accurate, is it?---Not in that respect. However, due to the time from when this was written originally, I cannot say whether or not I advised the writer of that report as to what was actually going on.

But it was an important matter?---Or whether I’ve just requested – or whether I requested just the job being raised as what was to Mr Voller’s behaviour. I’m not a 100 per cent sure.

But if - - -?---I’d be testing my memory in that respect.

But it’s certainly something you would have raised with Mr Clee at the time, if you rang him, isn’t it?---Yes, I would have definitely raised that with Mr Clee.

Because he gave you permission to open the doors to check his welfare?---That’s correct.

So just to be clear, in BE3, there’s only a reference to my client kicking the back of the doors?---That’s correct. That’s what it says in this report.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

That’s nowhere near as serious, is it, as someone threatening self-harm?---No, it’s not.

Which I’m suggesting to you is something that should have been included in that document?---If it was raised with the writer of that report at the time.

So if I can take you to paragraph 31 of your statement, the last three lines, your last sentence there commencing, “I remember”?---Paragraph 31. Yes.

Continuing:

I remember this, as I needed to go to the toilet before we arrived at Tennant Creek.

So you stopped the car to go to the toilet; is that correct?---That is correct.

And in terms of Mr Clee’s instructions, you couldn’t wait to go to the toilet at Tennant Creek?---No, unfortunately, I couldn’t. I am a diabetic, and if I need to go to the toilet, then I need to go to the toilet.

So it was important for you to go to the toilet, but not my client?---That’s correct.

Now, if I can take you back to your annexure BE2, the document you created?---Yes.

What I want to suggest to you in relation to that document is that it was created one month after the incident, after you became aware that my client made a relation – a complaint in relation to your conduct on that day; what do you say about that?---That would be incorrect.

And when you created the document what you did was you sanitised what really happened so that you were reflected well in the document; is that correct?---I don’t believe that to be correct.

Commissioners, that takes me to the end of this part, and I have two more questions to - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes. Thank you. We will need to adjourn in order to allow the closed court setup to occur.

MR LEWIN: Can I raise one matter. My name is Adrian Lewin; I appear for Barrie Clee. I wasn’t aware of this witness. It wasn’t on the documentation available to me via the online portal. There’s some significant matters in relation to Barrie Clee that’s been raised. I haven’t got instructions on them; I haven’t been able to review the documents in substance. There’s not much more I can do about it now, but I just wanted to put it on transcript that it may be that I seek instructions, and deal with it perhaps by way of a responsive statement. I don’t know, and I


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

thought it appropriate before the court closes to put it on transcript on behalf of my client.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes, thank you, Mr Lewin.

MS BROWNHILL: I rise to make a similar observation. That is, the substance of the allegation about the writer of the other IOMS report, we had no notice of, and there’s an intention that a responsive statement will be put in relation to that allegation also.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you. Noted. We will adjourn then to enable the court to be closed. Thank you.

ADJOURNED [11.07 am]

CLOSED SESSION ENSUED

[REDACTED INFORMATION]

PUBLIC SESSION RESUMED

RESUMED [11.41 am]

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you. Mr Evans. Ms Brownhill is going to ask you some questions now.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BROWNHILL [11.42 am]

MS BROWNHILL: Mr Evans, you will recall that it was suggested to you that you had prepared your IOMS report, BE3, after the complaint had been made in relation to the journey, and you rejected that suggestion. Do you remember giving that evidence?---Yes.

Can I just ask you to turn to BE1, the annexure to your statement?---Yes.

that comprises two emails between yourself and Mr Grenfell, the audits and investigation officer of the PSU, and if you have a look - - -?---That’s correct.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2700 B. EVANS XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MS BROWNHILL

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

If we can just scroll down, please, to the first email in the chain, that’s the email dated 27 April?---Yes.

Have a look at the first paragraph there?---Yes.

Is that the first you had become aware of the complaint made by Mr Voller in relation to the journey?---That is correct.

And that was an email that was sent well after the date of your IOMS report of 6 April; is that correct?---That’s correct.

Yes. Thank you.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: That’s all?

MS BROWNHILL: Yes.

MR CALLAGHAN: I have nothing further for Mr Evans. May he be excused.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes. Thank you for your assistance to the Commission, Mr Evans. There are no further questions and you are released from your summons to appear?---Thank you very much.

You are free to go now?---Thank you.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [11.44 am]

MR CALLAGHAN: Commissioners, there are a number of issues relating to the admission of documents concerning Mr Voller. The parties are working, hopefully collaboratively, towards a method by which those can be received without the need for further rulings. I just flag that because there is a volume of material - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: There certainly was.

MR CALLAGHAN: - - - that has been referred to and not yet formally dealt with, but we haven’t lost sight of that, but we don’t propose to hold things up by dealing – by even attempting to deal with that today. And Mr Goodwin will be taking the next witness, so - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you.

MR CALLAGHAN: - - - I will take my leave.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thanks Mr Callaghan. Thanks, Mr Goodwin.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2701 ©Commonwealth of Australia

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

MR GOODWIN: Commissioners, I call Lisa Coon.

<LISA MARIE COON, AFFIRMED [11.45 am]

MS KATHRAKIS: May it please the Commission, my name is Kathrakis, and I appear on behalf of Ms Coon.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you, Ms Kathrakis. Thank you, Mr Goodwin.

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR GOODWIN [11.46 am]

MR GOODWIN: Ms Coon, could you tell the Commissioners your full name?---Lisa Marie Coon.

And you’ve provided two statements to the Royal Commission, both signed on 12 April 2017?---I have.

The first is dated 12 April 2017, and it raises general matters and is also a response to the evidence of Dylan Voller; that’s right?---Correct.

And the second statement is dated 11 April 2017 and is in response to the evidence of AG?---Correct.

I tender those.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Each of those.

MR GOODWIN: I should ask: are those statements true and correct to the best of your knowledge?---They are.

I tender those statements, Commissioner.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: The first statement is exhibit 307, and the second exhibit 308.

EXHIBIT #307 STATEMENT OF LISA COON RESPONSIVE TO EVIDENCE OF DYLAN VOLLER DATED 12/04/2017

EXHIBIT #308 STATEMENT OF LISA COON RESPONSIVE TO THE EVIDENCE OF AG DATED 11/04/2017

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2702 L.M. COON XN©Commonwealth of Australia MR GOODWIN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

MR GOODWIN: Just a brief reminder: to the best of your ability, if you could refrain from naming individual detainees, or adversely naming Youth Justice Officers who have not given evidence, that would be appreciated?---Okay.

But we will – if necessary, we can provide you with a pseudonym if direct evidence comes up that requires that to occur. So it’s true, Ms Coon, that you’ve lived in Darwin for most of the last 32 years?---Yes.

And you have long experience that’s set out in your statement of working in youth detention facilities; that’s right?---Correct.

Both as a Juvenile Justice Officer or on the Corrections side of the operations of the facilities, as well as a teacher and principal of the school that operates in Don Dale Youth Detention Centre?---Correct.

And I won’t go through all of your qualifications, but I will highlight that you were actually the first senior case worker when the – what I will refer to as the old Don Dale Youth Detention Centre first opened in 1991?---That’s right.

That’s right? And you were a deputy superintendent and also, for a period of six months, acting superintendent at that facility?---Correct.

That occurred in the 1990s. Can I briefly ask what Don Dale was like back then?---Don Dale was completely different back then. When Don Dale first opened, it was akin to a hotel/motel in many aspects. The bedrooms had two single beds, the middle had a dressing table with drawers that, if I remember rightly, pink for girls, blue for boys, a big mirror that they could use, and fans above each of the beds. Of course, there was still a cell – back cell area even then, but those back cells had their own water bubblers with ice cold water coming out of those. The enclosed mesh that you see over the bars at that time was not there, there were bigger gaps, so it was quite – it was a bit, if you want to, you know – bit brighter and lighter back there. Basketball court, swimming pool, yeah, it was quite nice.

And it’s correct to say that the detainee population was much smaller at that time in the 1990s, would that be correct?---It was – yes, it ebbed and flowed, it was smaller, but they were different, yeah. The detainees were different as well.

In what regard?---I think it was 2003, so it wasn’t even – but even as far back as 2003, I remember doing some statistics and I think 85 per cent of the young people in detention were in and out within three months. If I recall correctly, I think the Youth Justice Act may have had a maximum 12 month sentence. I think 90 per cent of the offences were for unlawful use of motor vehicle and break, enter, steal, BES. That’s certainly not the case today. The young offender is bigger, is – circumstances of aggravation on probably 75 per cent or more of the young people there, and we have been working with young people that have been sentenced up to 10 years, certainly not in and out in three months, so - - -


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Is it still the case that the majority of the young people there are on remand rather than sentence?---I’m sorry, Commissioner, I haven’t been there since July last year, so I’m not sure.

Well, when you were last - - -?---Absolutely. At least 60 per cent, sometimes more.

Thank you.

MR GOODWIN: And you also worked for a period of three months at the Wildman River Wilderness Work Camp as deputy superintendent. You highlight that at paragraph 12 of your statement. What was Wildman River like to work at?---Wildman River was brilliant, had a completely different feel to Don Dale, obviously the lack of walls, etcetera, but there was a greater sense of camaraderie amongst the detainees in there, if you like. I think that’s probably a lot to do with the fact that they’re out there on their own, if you like, but the staff are also there seven days on, seven days off, so there was a consistency of staff, but you also must keep in mind that I think the policy at the time was that nobody was sent there that was on remand or for a violent offence.

Do you think that type of environment, or at least those types of principles, might be beneficial for children, that type of environment for young offenders to be - - -?---Absolutely.

- - - recreated?---Absolutely. There was also a sense of purpose for a lot of those young people as well, because they were doing work for the Conservation Commission, they were doing some things with Waterwatch, so there was a school there, a school teacher went out and slept there, I think Monday to Thursday afternoon, so they could go to school but they could also work. And a lot of the work they did was very practical and hands on and - - -

So it involved life skill type activities?---Very much so, yeah, very much so.

And I suppose one of the additional benefits was that it was on country, presumably because that would have been helpful because the majority of the young people there would have been Aboriginal at the time; is that right?---Yes. Majority would have been, yes.

Now, in terms of your work as an educator, you’ve been employed by the Department of Education since January 2011?---No, sorry - - -

2001, my apologies?---That’s okay.

And you’ve – and until recently your work has always been at the Tivendale School at the Don Dale Youth Detention Centre; that’s right?---Yes, correct.

And so you’ve been principal there since 2004?---Correct.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And you’ve been on leave since August 2016 for a year, and you’re currently teaching in Western Australia?---That’s right, yep.

Can I first briefly discuss your training. You’ve set out extensively your training that you’ve received in your statement, particularly in paragraph 14. Can I ask, have – because of the nature of the detainee population in Don Dale, have you received any training specific to dealing with children suffering from trauma or exhibiting complex behaviours?---No. I’m not sure of what specific training you’re talking about. Like, for example, in terms of we’ve sent off a couple of staff at one pointed for trauma informed practice.

Yes?---And they came back – okay. And they came back and did a PD with the rest of us. So you’re referring - - -

And you participated in - - -?---Yes.

- - - that professional development?---When they came back. Two staff went to that, and came back and did a brief PD with the documents and – yep.

So was it a bit of a train the trainer type activity?---Yes. Yeah. It was a one day, I think it was held, or two days held at Charles Darwin University, I think.

And - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: How long ago, if you can recall – and I only want a ballpark year, not precisely. Was it soon after you were teaching at the - - -?---No. Probably was, I don’t know, 2012, ’13, ’14.

Relatively recent?---Yeah.

MR GOODWIN: Do you think it would be helpful for all teachers at Don Dale to receive that type of training either at induction or throughout the course of their career?---Look, any training that value adds is valuable, and it does value add.

And considering a majority of detainees are Aboriginal in – at the Tivendale School - - -?---Yep.

- - - have you received any Aboriginal awareness or competency training or had any background in working in those communities?---Yes, yes, and yes. So yes, I’ve attended a number of cultural awareness training. I also lived for 12 months at Fitzroy Crossing in northern and, of course, I have worked in over 20 years with young indigenous people, both with Corrections and education.

And do you think that’s particularly helpful for teachers who work in Youth Detention Centres in the Northern Territory?---Yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And is it true that you’ve been involved in an organisation called the Australian Educators in Juvenile Justice?---Yes.

Could you briefly explain the objectives and activities of that organisation?---The Australian Educators in Juvenile Justice is a forum whereby teachers that work in schools such as Tivendale throughout Australia meet up, I think every two years or so, and the agenda will change from year to year, but it’s basically a way to inform a best practice, things that are working, things that aren’t working, innovations and new trends. Yeah.

Can I move on - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Can I just ask.

MR GOODWIN: Yes, of course.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Because I think you’re going somewhere else.

MR GOODWIN: I am.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Was your membership of that supported by the Department of Corrections?---Absolutely. Yes. They funded, and yes.

And were there particular aspects of belonging to that organisation that you found helpful in applying things to programs to teaching in Tivendale?---Yes. There were a number of things, Commissioner, that were particularly useful for us. One of those was also finding out every institution has a ratio of one to five, or one to six in the classroom, whereas I’m sure you’re aware that we will have up to 20 young people in the classroom. So we’re the only one – I think we’re staffed and funded for staffing one to five, one to six, but we don’t have as they do, one classroom per say with just five to six young offenders and one teacher.

So is your evidence that, in fact, all of the young people will be in the one room?---Yes.

And so you might be trying to teach 12-year-olds and 15 year olds - - -?---Absolutely.

- - - at the same time?---We’ve had in excess of 20 so anyone from 12 years, so anyone from 12 years old to someone 17, someone from Gunbalanya, somebody from Palmerston, somebody that can’t write their name, somebody we’re trying to get through year 11, all in the one classroom. Yes.

And do you have that one to five ratio, even if it’s in that jumble, I say?---I think we’re currently staffed up to about 36. Don’t quote me on that, so I think we have six teachers – six? Six teachers, yeah. But because – the nature of, you know, you can have 12 one week and 50 the - - -


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Yes?---Yeah.

..... a problem. Would that, in fact – I’m sorry to hijack your cross-examination.

MR GOODWIN: No, no. This is an area of cross-examination I intended to go to.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: ..... but presumably there could be more stability in their schooling if you were dealing just with sentenced young people rather than the remand people that will be in and out?---Absolutely. You know what you’re working with then, and what you can – you can plan towards. It’s extremely frustrating, and extremely challenging, and I think the teachers do an exceptional job with having young people that they don’t know if they’re going to have past the end of the week, month, etcetera.

There’s a lot to develop here, Mr Goodwin, but you probably will cover a lot of these issues anyway, so I will stop there.

MR GOODWIN: Yes. Thank you, Commissioner, and it is something that we will return to in terms of staff and student ratios and some of the challenges presented by the multi age and multi ability classroom factor.

Before I get there, moving on to your responsibilities as a principal, as principal of Tivendale School, just briefly. It’s right, isn’t it, that Tivendale is a special purpose school located within the Don Dale Youth Detention Centre that is operated by the Department of Education?---Correct.

And so it caters for children aged 10 to 17 years who are in detention either on sentence or on remand?---Correct. But I do think there is some leeway if the young person turns 18. I think they can apply to have them there a little bit longer. For example, if their sentence were to finish a couple of weeks later. So - - -

And in those cases you might still deliver education services to those young people?---To everybody.

Yes. And the school operates on a 45 week a year program?---It does now, yes. At one point we actually operated for 50 of the weeks, but we’ve cut that back to 45.

And that’s still an extended school year, isn’t it?---Yes.

Compared to mainstream schools?---The standard school year is 40 weeks.

Yes?---Correct.

And what are your main duties as principal of Tivendale School?---Main duties are simply to ensure that the school operates to the best of its capacity within its resources, so providing education services to the young people in detention.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And did you – do you yourself carry a teaching load as part of being principal of Tivendale?---Not normally, no, but I have at different times. In the last 12 months that I was there, I think I was teaching health and at one point – very badly, by the way was, I teaching art. I was terrible at that, but when the situation arose that we didn’t have – a staff member injured themselves, then I stepped in, yeah, but not a teaching load as such.

But you might relief teach, essentially, as principal if you’re under-resourced at that particular time or - - -?---Yes. Because, unlike other schools, I don’t employ relief teachers. It’s just not worth it. It’s – it doesn’t work.

Can you expand on that? Why?---Because they don’t understand the requirements in a classroom. We count out pencils and count them back in before the young people leave. You can’t use blue tac, because young people have used blue tac to block up locks. You can’t use just skewers in art, for example, because they break them off and put them in – there’s so many things that are innocuous, everyday, that people not used to working in a detention centre don’t understand. The keys, you know. Having keys, security, young people have to be patted down and things like that. So it’s just not worth it. It’s – yeah.

And I’ll ask some questions about the Corrections environment shortly. Can I ask about the operation of Tivendale School. Is it right to say that, traditionally, the focus is on literacy and numeracy?---Correct.

And do you have – play a part in designing the curriculum that’s taught at Tivendale by your teachers?---Yes.

And so as principal would you assist in setting the lesson plans - - -?---No.

- - - to be taught?---I wouldn’t assist there. We would have a meeting across the school about what we’re – and again, this may have changed. You have to keep in mind I haven’t been there since – so what we did, we have a meeting across the school with all the teachers and they would look at the – they follow the Australian curriculum, the multi-year levels, and according to what’s in the literacy and numeracy, they would look at that and they would plan for the class, and the teachers would plan that. They would understand their students’ strengths and weaknesses a lot better than I would, so they would know what resources might work and what resources won’t work. So that’s up to them.

But you might play an oversight role to ensure consistency between the classrooms; is that right?---Absolutely, that was something that – because young people can be moved just like that, if their classification comes through, they’re in your class one week, then they may move to another classroom. So to ensure consistency, so young people feel comfortable and have some control over what they’re studying and learning, we made sure that whatever is being taught that week in this class and being taught in the other week – in the other class. So - - -


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Because of some of those challenges with the changing nature of risk classifications, that might mean students are shifted into particular classroom?---Yes. Correct.

And I will explore that issue soon. Going back to Commissioner White’s questions about resourcing, that go to resourcing, in your time – and I acknowledge that you haven’t been there for a year, but just speaking of the time you have been there – has the school been adequately resourced over that period?---Excuse me. Do you mean just recently or over the - - -

No. Over the period that you’ve been principal?---No. I believe there was a period when I wasn’t adequately resourced and I went to the department and was able to provide the statistics from the other schools in detention centres around Australia and successfully – we doubled our staff, teaching staff from three to six.

Do you remember when abouts that was?---No, I don’t. I’m sorry. It would be available somewhere, maybe – I don’t know. Was it 2000 – 2008, ’9, ’10, ’11, I couldn’t tell you.

About five to six years ago or so?---Yes.

And so, since that time, since you requested those additional staffing resources, do you feel like you’ve been adequately staffed?---Look, in a perfect – adequately staffed, I say yes, because we don’t have the other, additional classrooms, but in a perfect environment, in a perfect world, we would stick to – (1) we would be able to control where we put the young people in class, so that they would be by age or ability level or family ties, however that might look, in a classroom with probably no more than six to eight young people with a classroom support officer and a teacher.

And that has not been the case during your period as principal?---No.

And you would wish for that to happen in a perfect world?---Well, in a perfect world – I mean, you’ve got the current acting principal here as well I think if you wanted to ask him, but I think in a perfect world that would be lovely, that would be wonderful. It would make such a difference in terms of – I believe anyway, in terms of what the young people could actually learn, if you were actually, “Alright, you’re around the same level, this is what we’re doing.” I think that would make a huge difference.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Have you struggled to achieve the perfect world? It doesn’t sound like a perfect world, really just one of delivering competently education services to young people. Did you advocate for more rooms for your school?---Well, if you need more rooms you need more teachers so, yeah, we don’t have more teachers.

Did you seek to put a position on the basis of best practice before the – it would be the Education Department or Corrections that you would do this?---The space would be Corrections, the teachers would be Education.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So it’s a fusion of the two, yes. Have you, sort of, asked for more?---We have asked for more. We have had extra class, I think four was the maximum, I’m trying to think, that we had four classrooms at once, Commissioner. I think four.

How many separate rooms would you need in order to achieve an optimum outcome in numeracy and literacy for your young people?---Well, again, a room with one to six would be perfect.

That - - -?---Well, that would depend on the day. If there’s 24 kids, I’d need four – you know, four rooms, and be able to move them according to ability level. If there’s 50 kids, you know, I’d need almost nine, so it just – it depends.

Very flexible, isn’t it .....?---Unfortunately, it’s the fluidness of – you know, you can come in one day and there’s six kids sitting in front of you that weren’t there yesterday, and you accommodate them.

COMMISSIONER GOODA: They might be there for a couple of days?---They might be out.

Yes?---Yeah. Or they might be there longer. We don’t know.

MR GOODWIN: And – and – and so would that be a priority area for further resourcing, that kind of – that getting the staff to student ratio right in the Tivendale School?---It’s not the only priority. I think again – I can’t stress this enough. Having the ability – and things may have changed – having the ability for the school to be able to say, “Okay, you three need to be together, you’re both – you’re studying year 11, we need to run you together. You guys over there, there’s a – “ you know, working at a pre-primary level of literacy and numeracy, “You guys need to be together, or you two.” You know, it’s – that would be awesome, to be able to put the young people into groups where you could have the maximum impact would be brilliant and then obviously not too many in a classroom.

And I might move to that, because we’re talking about that issue. So – and this is issues around the challenge of the particular environment, the Corrections environment you’re in, and I suppose there are two unique qualities associated with Tivendale School. One is the particular student population, the unique student population, and the other is the unique environment in which you find yourself operating a school, being a detention centre. Thinking about the population first, it’s right that there – that the student population is transitional in nature?---Yes.

And that many are in there only for a short period of time?---Yes.

And an uncertain period of time?---Yes.

Because up to 70 per cent of children are on remand?---Remand, yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And that a majority of the detainee population, about 95 per cent are Aboriginal?---Correct.

And that many of them have English as their second, third, fourth language?---Correct.

And that there’s low educational engagement, so low school attendance rates for those children outside of the detention centre - - -?---Yes.

- - - environment?---It’s very rare that we have a young person come in that’s been attending school.

I believe in Mr McNair’s statement in the Tivendale School profile it’s up to 70 per cent of students have a less than 25 per cent school attendance rate?---Correct.

And most of the children have experienced some form of trauma in their lives?---Agreed, yes.

And many of them display complex behaviours?---Correct.

And you’re dealing with a student population that is multi age and multi ability, so ranging right from 10 to 17 with very different levels of educational attainment?---Correct.

And there’s also an under diagnosis of health problems associated with those young people?---I would agree, yes.

In that situation, where you have a young person enter a classroom, like you said, that – you used that example of six children who might be new on one day, do you feel that you have enough, or that your teachers of enough, information about a student’s background to be able to properly individualise the learning for that student?---No. I mean, if we could have information, including health and family circumstance and – you know, all of that information is valuable.

And can you expand on that issue around health, knowledge about health - - -?---Well - - -

- - - is that a particular problem for teachers at Tivendale?---I think it’s a particular problem for any teacher, but I think particularly in Tivendale because you have so many young people and we just assume that all of those young people come from some sort of – have had some sort of trauma. But it’s very difficult when you have somebody just sitting in front of you that you know nothing about. I have accessed, through the department’s portals and things, to what’s called Dashboard and that provides school information, but when we’ve already established they don’t attend school the information is probably outdated and somewhat irrelevant because there is a – a very quick maturation process that occurs between primary school and the age of the young people that we – we get them. So knowing more about their home


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

environment, knowing about where they’ve been living, the circumstances, any health issues, health issues of their family, of those that are raising them. A lot of these young people don’t actually live with parents as such, or even grandparents, or even family sometimes. They may have been in and out of care. All that is very important to be able to understand any difficulties they might be having in class.

And do teachers at Tivendale have access to the appropriate systems that are operated by government that might provide at least some of that information?---If we wanted to go to, and find out more about a young person’s background, the way that we would go through, or the way that I used to go through was go through the case managers and ask them.

And, for the most part, did you find that they had the right amount of information for you?---They were very helpful, yes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: So could they – as far as you can say, could the case managers at the detention centre access, for example, a young person’s child protection file and health department file?---I’m not sure about the health department file. I’m not sure what they could access. I just know that information, if I was – wanted information about a young person, to a certain degree I would be provided with that information, or told that, “Look, they’ve just come from living with grandma or they’ve been in a – “ you know, in a department run facility.

Would you, as a matter of course, get a profile on each new person?---No.

Not?---No.

MR GOODWIN: And so in that circumstance, is it really up – up to the teacher to directly find out some of the key information they might need from the student themselves?---Yes. We have those conversations with the young people about, you know, where they’ve been living, who they’ve been living with, and that sort of thing, yep.

And - - -?---But we don’t – we usually do that, you know, when they first come in, but we don’t dig too deeply at that point. It’s more about – yeah.

And do you find that the health assessments conducted by Corrections are able to properly assist teachers understand the potential health issues of a child that - - -?---No.

- - - might impact on their learning environment. No. Do you think that more needs to be done in that regard?---Yes.

Anything in particular that you think needs to be done to assist - - -?---Well, I just think - - -


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

- - - your staff?---I think the service, the health service that’s provided currently – and again I don’t have intimate knowledge, I don’t work for Corrections, I work for Education, but I can speak to when I did work for them, for example. I think it’s really just a cursory health service that’s provided and I think that a more substantive health service could be provided and checks, including mental health checks, regular eye checks, hearing checks that impact on us in the classroom.

Which are obviously prevalent issues amongst the particular population - - -?---Yes.

- - - that you’re teaching, and so they’re particular challenges that, without being armed with that knowledge, would disadvantage the teacher, really; is that right?---Absolutely.

As well as the student, of course?---And the Youth Justice Officers that work with young people, too. It disadvantages everybody if you don’t have a full understanding of some of the issues that the young people are facing.

And I might briefly go back to resourcing. You mention in your statement a number of programs delivered, both internally and by external providers that you helped facilitate as principal. Do you believe there were enough programs available to students during your time as principal? Had there – well, had there been enough resources to invest in those programs throughout the course of your time as principal?---From an Education Department perspective?

Yes?---Yes.

And, well, could more resources be useful?---More resources is always useful. You know, there could be a lot more done. At one point there, just recently, we did trial a longer school day. So to try and keep young people engaged with the school until I think it was about 6 pm or something like that, so more resources is always – that would allow us to use and buy the services of other organisations.

But it’s your evidence, on the whole, that while you have been principal there have been enough resources to deliver particular - - -?---Yes.

- - - education programs to students?---I think so, yes.

Specifically, about new Don Dale, we’ve discussed briefly the facilities at new Don Dale and the classroom facilities in particular. Do you think that they’re adequate?---I think the building is sadly lacking and I think that has been shown. I don’t think anyone that’s had a look through there – but unfortunately I don’t think we ever got the opportunity, it might have changed, to actually do much there. I know a lot was planned.

And why was that not occurred, from your perspective?---Well, from the moment we sort of moved in, I think there was a riot within the first week of moving in there. It seems that everybody has had to chase their tail, the young people have destroyed


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

one accommodation block or one room or this or that. It’s – you know, they’re forever trying to fix up the damage that’s been done. So I think the wonderful thing that did happen was M Block, which I haven’t had the opportunity to see, but that was a huge initiative to put a lot of facilities and I think there’s a music room, art room, library, computer room, things like that. But in terms of the accommodation, I think, well, they may have caught up now, but they were forever trying to fix them.

So you think that’s been the problem with the adequacy of facilities, not necessarily the facility themselves, but what has occurred to those facilities?---Look, the facility’s old. It’s really old, and you just have to look at it and you see that it’s old. So the facility is not ideal. It’s not purpose built for young people, we all know that. But yes, part of the problem has been definitely there has been trying to catch up and fix all the damage that continues to be done. Rather than, you know, being able to say, “Right, we need to fix this up, let’s go and do that.”

But it being, as you said, an old facility and not one that’s purpose built for children?---Yes.

Does that make it harder therefore to create an appropriate learning environment for children to be able to learn and thrive?---The classrooms – funnily enough, we were very happy with the classrooms, because we had gone from Holtze that – we didn’t have classrooms, essentially they were just rooms, and the – apart from M Block in the old Don Dale, our classrooms were tiny. So in terms of space that we have, and you’re talking about the four walls and the oval and things like that, the classrooms themselves we were quite happy with. It would be wonderful to have, you know, purpose built class rooms that have Wi-Fi and you know, a whiteboard here and a blackboard there, and a wet area there, yes, but from our perspective maybe we just got used to it, but the classrooms, yeah.

And my final question in terms of your roles and responsibility as principal, who was – or who is responsible for transition arrangements for children leaving Don Dale in terms of the appropriate transition planning that might occur with another school that a child then moves into?---Case managers were responsible for transitioning. If a young person was going to school, that would be me.

And what type of transition planning was conducted directly in terms of their school engagement?---Not a lot, because a lot of the young people weren’t going to school.

And were there attempts to use the opportunity that they were in Don Dale when they were attending school, to then – and I know there’s a challenge with the uncertain timing of a child’s exit, but were there attempts to use that as an opportunity to ensure connections between Tivendale and whatever school might then take the child after they left?---Yes, if they were. I think, as an exercise once, I took all the young children that were in detention and took away those that are compulsory school age, those that are on remand, because we never know when they are being released, and it came down – there were two students in the entire school that may have been able to attend school upon release.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Upon exit?---Mmm.

Why would the other ones not have been able to attend school?---Well, for – the majority were on remand, and so we don’t know when they’re being released. If they are being released and they’re being assisted by NAAJA they had a through care model, and so they would often take that role with the young person. Sometimes, we didn’t know where the young person was going, where they were going to be living, so that made it difficult in terms of trying to organise school. If you don’t know where they’re going to be living, you don’t know where they’re going to go to school.

And so would it have assisted – so in that example, would it have assisted to have more through care options, where you might have an external organisation who knows the child’s circumstances more thoroughly, be able to engage in that type of planning, or at least able to work with you?---Anybody can assist, yes.

To be able to do that?---Yes, absolutely anybody.

Moving on to some of the challenges faced in the Corrections environment, and we’ve talked about some of the uniqueness of the student population, and – and those issues associated with low educational engagement and experience of trauma, health issues, complex behaviours: what, in your experience, is the best way, or the basic philosophy, or basic philosophy for dealing with those young people?---Taking a trauma informed approach to having the young people in the classroom is that you try to ensure that there is consistency, that the rules are – and expectations are explicit and well known, that your day-to-day operation be as consistent over the week as possible, so you stick to a timetable, you have the timetable visible, that young people know what is expected of them, and that you don’t pull the rug out from under them, so there’s no sudden change to – as much as possible – to what you’re doing or what the expectations are so that they feel they have some control as well.

You kind of discuss this briefly in paragraph 36 of your statement and you say creating a “structured and predictable environment”?---Yes, correct.

Is that a sense of what you’re discussing there?---That’s it, yes.

And do you find that young people react well to that type of environment?---Absolutely.

And does that, therefore, make a teacher’s job easier to deal with young people who might display complex behaviours or have a background in trauma?---Absolutely.

And how do you best design a curriculum to work with that type of population? What are the best – kind of engaging education, what’s the best engaging education delivery for that type of population?---That’s a very good question. What works for us is having – I can’t emphasise this enough – is having staff that absolutely enjoy


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

and love what they do, and have the belief that every person in their classroom is able to achieve. So they have high expectations, and they make that those expectations explicit as well. And then, really, it’s then about – we structure our school day so, because we do so much in terms of the literacy, functional literacy and numeracy, it’s sort of a pyramid, so at the end of the day after lunch that’s when we tend to do the art or sport or music or – it’s like the reward for being there all day, if you like. But trying to pitch work as well, that’s at the young – which is probably really difficult, one of the most difficult aspects, that is at that young person’s level. So that it’s not too hard, not too easy, yeah.

And that must be particularly challenging because of the lack of information about the student profile?---Correct.

Their low educational engagement, and the uncertain time you have them in the classroom?---Correct.

And in terms of the curriculum and that kind of – the functional literacy and numeracy shifting into more of the social sciences activities, do you feel like there’s enough room for social and emotional learning for children in Tivendale, particularly considering many display complex behaviours or have perhaps mental health problems associated with their social and emotional wellbeing?---Look, I think – obviously, I think any system can improve. So the new Don Dale, as opposed to the old, certainly doesn’t provide the opportunities, from my experience, that the old Don Dale did. We had that huge oval and you know, huge rec rooms, again I’ve forgotten that that – actually M Block is open now, so maybe they do have that opportunity now. I can’t say. I think that’s why it was – its purpose was to get young people there together in groups to engage in more of the social aspect.

And you think that’s important for students?---Absolutely. It was missing for quite a while when we were moving. Yeah, it was - - -

So there was a lot of upheaval at that time, that’s the end of 2014, start of 2015?---Between – absolutely.

Between moving to Holtze and then to Berrimah?---I think there was a lot of upheaval even at the old Don Dale from – you know, prior to 2014. I think it had been building for quite a while.

And why do you say that? What do you think were the key factors associated with some of those pressures that would – that were coming in 2014, 2015?---Look, there was a cohort of young people there that I would just say – I would describe them as being out of control. They were a lot of co-offenders in there at the time. A lot of them were older, and we went through a period, it just seemed – it just seemed like they were either, you know, smashing through the ceilings, or breaking things, or getting on roofs, or assaulting staff. It seemed like it was happening on a weekly basis. I know it wasn’t but, working in there, that’s how that felt and it was over a


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

period of time. You just come into board and you just look up at the walls and the holes and, you know, the damage to bedrooms and things like that.

You mention this cohort. How many young people are we talking about as a percentage of the population?---It’s only – it’s like with this Royal Commission, it’s just a small percentage of – of young people, maybe half a dozen of them. But the danger, I guess, with that half a – that half a dozen is that if they’re not kept separate or removed from the others, a lot of the young people in there, they are part of their group when they’re not in Don Dale. That is – you know, they are co-offenders, some of them are family, friends. So it’s very easy, if you have one person, a ringleader that’s going to go off, it’s very easy for the others to join in. That’s my perspective on how that was occurring at that period of time.

And in terms of the school environment, considering that’s a small group of students, were the majority of students well behaved in the classroom - - -?---Yes, I think they – yes.

- - - from your perspective?---Very well behaved.

And so, in your time as principal, young people who attended Tivendale were engaged and well behaved and - - -?---The majority, I would say, yes.

Yes?---Absolutely.

The vast majority?---The overwhelming majority, yes.

And Mr McNair gave evidence that a majority of the students have already been referred to and are clients of Student Support Services?---Mmm.

You’re aware of that?---Yes.

How does that assist the teachers in a practical sense?---They – Student Services can provide information about their involvement with the young people, so a chronological history, if you like, Commissioners, about their difficulties from the Department of Education’s perspective. There may be reports that are available that we could read that would assist us, and there may be PD that they might be able to offer. I know I had a meeting, they came out to see me to offer support, but they weren’t able to provide the support that I needed and that was – I asked them if they could – because they said, “Is there anything we can do?” And I said, “Yes. Practically, I would love to have someone come in half a day a fortnight, half a day a month and do the eye and hearing, sight and hearing tests for me.” But I was told that couldn’t happen.

Why?---Resources. They just told me to go through the usual way, that you put the paperwork in and request it, but for us it’s not practical because the young person has gone by then. It’s – you know, that might work in mainstream schools where they have a student for 12 months or two years or three years. It doesn’t work for us.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And again, that’s a particular challenge because a majority of your students are probably suffering from those problems, or at least a higher proportion - - -?---Correct.

- - - than in a mainstream school.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: You mentioned iron deficiencies as the first example. I noticed. It is it quite prevalent in your experience?---Where did I mention that, sorry?

When you gave examples of things that – conditions. Was it not iron deficient?

MR GOODWIN: Eye and ear.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: I thought you said iron deficiency?---Sorry.

My mistake, I was about to follow up, thinking that was interesting. Alright. Well, they might have iron deficiency as well?---They might, Commissioner.

Yes. Thank you.

MR GOODWIN: You mention in paragraph 56 of your statement that Dylan Voller was the only detainee you requested special funding for in order to employ an aid to work specifically with him. Can I take it from that sentence that – did you – were there other detainees you requested special funding for, but simply not for a specific aid or was he the only person you ever requested special funding for, full stop?---He was the only person. We haven’t required it for anybody else.

Why haven’t you required it for other students, particularly considering some of the challenges faced?---Because the other students are well behaved generally, or not – not to the extent that Mr Voller was – his behaviour was – yeah.

And that worked for Mr Voller, didn’t it, having a one-on-one aid?---It worked for him, yeah. As long as it was on his conditions, he enjoyed working in the back computer room, and would get on the computer as much as he could. His engagement was still very, sort of, spasmodic if you like, so he would work really well sometimes and then he wouldn’t. But that worked for a while with Dylan, yes.

Can I ask about the challenges of the Corrections environment now? In particular, what was your experience of working with and having Youth Justice Officers in the classroom?---Youth Justice Officers, their first role is the safety and security of the young people in the classroom, so that’s their first role. And then, if there are no issues in terms of that, then they are required, I believe, to assist the staff with the young people in there.

And what kind of assistance, from your perspective, what was the kind of best assistance that a YJO could give in the classroom?---Sitting down with someone one


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

on one and just help them. Some of our young people aren’t able to add two digits together without a – you know, they can’t add five and six without a counter or something, so for those people I would you now – absolutely loved when they could sit down with them one on one and assist them.

And did a majority of Youth Justice Officers do that - - -?---Not the majority, no.

- - - in the classrooms that you’ve seen. Do you wish they would?---Yes, of course, as much assistance as we can have in the classroom. I’d love to have one on one with every young person that’s in there, if we could.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Do you think that was a lack of confidence in their skills, or just disinterest in doing that sort of work?---I think – look, I think a lot of it is lack of confidence. Some of them actually said that to me, and pulled me aside and said, “Look, you know, my level of maths isn’t – please don’t ask me to help there.” So that was some of it Commissioner, yes, which again is why I would deliberately, if they were going to help, I would ask them to help someone that really required it, not someone doing year 11 or something.

MR GOODWIN: But were there others that were disinterested?---Yeah. There were – there were some that were disinterested, yes. I would call it disinterested, but that’s from me looking out from my perspective, yeah.

But no doubt, even if you noticed that, children would notice that as well, if someone was disinterested?---Well, no, there’s a difference. They might still be interested in the young people and they might – so they might be disinterested in helping them in school. It doesn’t mean that they’re disinterested in the young person per se, because I wouldn’t say that, no.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Would you be able to identify – I’m not asking – not now, but within the management system, those Youth Justice Officers that you thought were a better fit for the classroom than others?---Absolutely.

Did you ask for them to be rostered into the school?---No.

That was beyond your capacity?---Yes.

MR GOODWIN: You mention in your statement at paragraph 37 - - -?---Sorry, can I – can I just – to qualify that, Commissioner, you need to know that most of the staff that were on during the day shift would be in class anyway. Very few of them would be out on the floor, so they would actually be there anyway.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: So that would lead to extra crowding?---Yes. Depending on the numbers, we’d have generally two to three, generally around two, two staff. So if they were on a day shift and we ran the normal school day shift, they would – they would be in our classrooms. There might be someone – well, they’re


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

certainly a lot better funded and staffed now, but there might be someone on court, someone doing medical, someone doing visits, but the rest of them would – yep.

Be in school?---Yeah, up to six, seven, eight, yeah.

MR GOODWIN: And so you mention in your statement, and we’ve discussed this previously in your evidence, this is at paragraph 37, that in an ideal environment a child’s age and educational attainment and perhaps special needs would be the only facts to determine the physical classroom that they’re in, but instead essentially security classification determines the location of a student. Is that frustrating as a teacher and principal?---Extremely.

Why?---Because for any significant learning to occur, it needs to be targeted at that level. It’s very difficult when you have a class of people from 10 to 17, English as a fourth language, you know, can’t write their name, someone doing year 11 in one classroom. It’s impossible to target just for their particular needs. If you had a class of young people that were at the same level, or had the same sort of needs or something like that, then you can target that curriculum directly for what their individual requirements is, with much greater success, I believe, than multi ability levels and - - -

And - - -?---Particularly ability.

And did you as a principal have any influence over those decisions by Corrections in terms of the classifications of children?---Well, yes, I was on the classification committee for the greater majority of my time there.

And did you feel like, was that – was that – the focus of those classifications simply on issues associated with behaviour rather than educational need?---Yes.

And would you have liked to have been able to influence those classifications in such a way that took into account the educational needs of students?---Yes, absolutely. You know, I can’t stress enough, from our perspective as educators in juvenile, in a juvenile detention centre, if we were able to group the young people we would group them very differently.

And more generally how did you find that – being involved in that classification system process?---It was good up until – yeah, it was good having the education perspective there was valuable for everybody, I think, yeah.

Did you find generally speaking that students behaved better in school – so, in participating in that process, were students typically better behaved in the classroom as opposed to outside the classroom, or vice versa, or it was a mix?---No, no. The young people always in my experience in 20 something years behaved, while I’ve been there, much, much better in the classroom than they – we’ve never had riots, you know, that sort of stuff. Yeah, very well behaved, and it’s been commented on by people that come in to teach the young people or work with them in programs.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Of course, the classroom environment is different from the outside the classroom environment in a detention centre, but is it – would I be right in saying that part of the reason why children are better behaved in the classroom was because of some of those things you mentioned before about knowing the rules, consistency of treatment, those – those types of things that led to better behaviour by students?---Absolutely. Young people were very much aware of the consequences of misbehaving in school. So they – yeah.

And from your perspective, and this is also considering you were a casual Youth Justice Officer for a year in 2013 and 2014, in your experience was the same type of treatment occurring from Corrections regarding children and consistency of treatment and application of the rules?---No.

Do you mind expanding on that a little?---Look, it’s really easy from our perspective. We have these young people, same young people, five days a week, five hours a day. I’m very pleased to say that, in addition to myself, one of the staff there has been there for 20 years, another one for about 10, someone else for eight. Two of the classroom assistants we poached from Corrections, and so we have people that have been there a long time. And again, we are extremely consistent in application of rules, more – well, when I say consistent, more so than Corrections. By the very nature, they have three shifts a day, Commissioner, of maybe, you know, eight, 12, 15 people coming – coming in, and over those three shifts you’ve got lots of different personalities, and I think you’ve already been provided with evidence, some of the staff, you know, do things differently. Someone tried to bring in Maccas for the kids, which the kids said they liked. It’s against the rules. Someone might let them stay up late. The next person won’t. So that caused issues.

And that’s - - -?---Not only for the young people, but the staff as well.

Yes?---Because they would be abused, you know, “Why can’t I stay up late? Such and such let me stay up late the night before.” You know, you can understand that.

And if a child’s staying up late, I presume they’re not showing up to school as ready to engage in learning as .....?---When I say up – when I say “up late”, we’re not talking late, late.

No?---But, for example, they had TVs in their room – have TVs in their room, some of the shifts would let them watch TV until late at night and yes, I would notice a difference in the morning.

And I presume that makes it harder for your teachers?---Absolutely.

In terms of students who are classified at risk, so rather than the general classification system, but students who are directly classified at risk, those students would not attend school; is that right?---At risk students, no.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And were you provided with information from Corrections as to why a child had been placed at risk?---Yes. I would usually be informed of that by the case – case worker.

But you had no involvement in that decision-making process?---We had - - -

The at risk decision?--- - - - no involvement in any – yeah, no.

And what type of educational delivery would occur for those students?---None. We wouldn’t deliver to the young people at risk.

Is there a policy reason for that?---No. Not that I’m aware of. It’s just that when they’re at risk they usually have an at risk ground, and they’re usually in one of the bedrooms at risk, so they may have reading material. If they wanted their schoolwork, they could probably have their schoolwork, that wouldn’t be an issue for us, but that’s a decision that Corrections will make.

So it would not be – you would not be involved in a decision to be able to provide that young person with educational material or any other – yeah, with educational material; is that right?---So I don’t quite understand. If they requested it, if they want it, absolutely I could give it to them. But it wouldn’t be up - - -

It wouldn’t be up to them?---Yes. It’s not up to me to provide them, particularly – you know, with sharps and things, it’s not up to me to provide that, it would be up to Corrections. I could provide it to Corrections.

And is it your evidence that that would mostly occur on the basis that the young person themselves had requested that material?---Yes.

So it would – the onus would be borne by the young person to ask for educational material if they were on an at risk classification?---Yes.

Do you believe that teachers should have more of a role in the classification system operating in Don Dale Youth Detention Centre?---No. They’re already involved.

Is there an objection?---Sorry?

Generally, the classification system?---My understanding, unless it’s changed ,we already are involved. We have somebody attend as part of that.

And do you believe that that’s sufficient involvement?---Yes.

In terms of the general relationship with Corrections between the Department of Education and Corrections, would you characterise the information flow between Corrections as education as a good one or an insufficient one?---I think it – over the main, in 20 years, I’ve been extremely lucky to enjoy a very good relationship,


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

working relationship with Corrections, so yes. Obviously, there’s information I’m not a party to, because it’s none of my business and has nothing to do with education.

And did you receive – would you say that you uniformly received information about students, particularly say critical incidents that might have occurred that would impact on their learning in a timely manner from Corrections?---No, there were times when we weren’t, and we didn’t. And so what occurred then, I was granted access, IOMS access so I would go in first thing every morning and read the case notes to see if there had been any upsetting news for the young people that may impact on their behaviour that day or if they had been sick or they had a phone call or a fight between two, so I didn’t direct those two to sit together in class. So I would go in the morning. Before school started, I would read all of those and have a morning meeting, every morning, with the staff and impart the relevant information.

And that was on your own initiative that you requested that access?---Yes.

In terms of the negotiation of the memorandum of understanding signed in March 2016, did you play a part in negotiating that memorandum of understanding?---I did.

Would you say it was a significant part of negotiation – of negotiating that - - -?---Yes.

- - - agreement? And what was the impact of the lack of the memorandum of understanding? Was there – did you notice a difference once roles were defined between Education and Corrections?---No, I didn’t. I – yeah, I didn’t, but to be fair, I only worked there for about 12 weeks after that.

And prior to that time, how were the roles and responsibilities of Education and Corrections known by staff of either department?---That’s a very good question. I think – I think one of the benefits, from my perspective anyway, was that I worked for Corrections for quite a number of years, and even at Don Dale, prior to moving into education and working there. So with the benefit of that and understanding, I also was very clear with our staff, Don Dale is and always will be a detention centre first and then there’s Tivendale School under that, so I think that always helped with any frustrations, is understanding clearly that it needed to operate first as a detention centre and then the school came under that. But I had – honestly had no issues in terms of – that I could recall in terms of understanding what my role was and what the role of the school was or what the role of the teachers were.

And out of interest, do you think that’s the right way around, to have the school essentially completely subject to the operation of Corrections who were operating the detention centre?---Yes.

Can you explain why?---Because the safety and security and the running of that centre to ensure that your staff are safe and that young people are safe, then those sort of conditions that they are responsible for must be in place.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Could there be room, though, for greater – for you as a principal to be, and for your teachers to be more involved in the more general aspects of – of a child’s experience in a detention centre? Particularly because of the power of education which you’ve discussed in your statement, do you think there could be more of a role for the school to be a more central and prominent part of the detention centre, for the benefit of children?---Look, it could and that was explored at one point. I think I mentioned it earlier. We did look at trialling, and we did trial for a period, a longer school day, another initiative I discussed with Mr Middlebrook. I was concerned a number of the young people were not accepted by a lot of schools in the community upon release, for various issues, and I have had young people before ask me if they could, even when they were released, could they continue to come back to our school. So I spoke to Mr Middlebrook and we considered when we moved to the new Don Dale, there was an area out the front and I wanted to trial operating that as a school, so that the young people that had just been released for continuity purposes, and because I know that the overwhelming majority do not attend school when they leave us, they are familiar with our teachers, they are familiar with the rules and, you know, consequences and expectations of the school. So in terms of that, yes, I thought that we could run a longer school day, we were getting chickens and you know, running a veggie garden, so really expanding on programs. I think at one point I even asked NAAJA if they could come in weekly or fortnightly and run a program for us at 4.30, you know, 5 o’clock. So my idea was if we extended our school day that when the hard yards had, for want of a better word, the literacy and numeracy, that we then looked at – expanded a bit more, if you like, and took care of some of those other things, mental health, organisations in the community that might be able to benefit them, parenting classes, you know, things like that.

And was that supported by management, of either your department or Corrections?---Yes. I had a couple of meetings, yes, with our department. They liked the idea, yes.

But it went no further than meetings?---No. It – it didn’t go any further than meetings.

Were you ever told why?---Well, I probably have to assume some responsibility for that, but it just became very difficult when we talked and thought about how we would get them there and then what – they could just get up and walk out. Could they mix with the other young people? Did it have to be outside? Yeah.

So it was security concerns that shut down those types of ideas?---Look, it wasn’t one particular concern. To be quite honest, I can’t remember why we stopped meeting about that. It may have been that I left. I can’t remember, to be quite honest, but we did have meetings about that and I did discuss those with Mr Middlebrook, with Marion Guppy and I think with Sue Healy, who was my direct line manager at the time, so - - -

Were you disappointed that they didn’t – those types of initiatives that you had thought about didn’t get up eventually?---Yes. Obviously, yes. It would be great.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Because I do think that the young people, you know, keep them full and keep them active, so feed them and keep them busy, I believe a 100 per cent and that includes up to, you know, just before they go to bed.

In terms of the fact that a majority of the student population is Aboriginal, what cultural programs in school or what cultural learning occurred in school, in your experience, for Aboriginal children?---It would be inappropriate for us to run some of the cultural programs specific that we’ve got in. So we did use some organisations like Danila Dilba and CAAPS, and other organisations as such, to run some programs for us including sexual health, mental health, even just – yeah.

And those were because the indigenous organisations were delivering those, was it your experience that those were delivered in a culturally competent - - -?---Appropriate way, correct.

And do you feel like the teaching resources you had were particularly relevant for Aboriginal children?---We developed a lot of our own, actually, to – for example, there was a reading serious based on indigenous dreamtime stories that were just books that I made, worksheets and things that we were able to – so, you know, that’s what teachers do anyway.

But it sounds like a lot of that was on the basis of your own initiative?---Correct.

Rather than supported by the department - - -?---It’s not.

- - - in terms of resources?---Not supported by the department because they have spent, have been initiatives – I think as a teacher full stop, wherever you are, there is a lack of resources that are culturally inclined towards indigenous students, full stop. It’s really difficult to – to find resources.

Finally, you mention in paragraph 38.1 and .2 of your statement your approach to students who might speak English as a second, third or fourth language?---Mmm.

And speak a traditional language?---Yes.

And that there might be occasion where young people are told to speak English for a time as a way to manage a disruption that might have come?---Correct.

Could you explain why you believe that’s an appropriate reaction to that display of behaviour?---Sometimes we get – as young people do, sometimes, we will get quite a cohort of people, say, from the Red Centre and maybe some from, you know, Port Keats, Oenpelli, wherever, and if they don’t get along, there very quickly becomes a division and they will call each other – you know, use racist slurs and names and call each other names, so generally speaking we deliberately sit people from – that spoke the same language, the same area, family, together, so that they could speak to each other. In fact, we would even rely on them sometimes to explain in language some of the things that we might have been doing in class. However, when we got


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

situations – and I can think of a couple – where they were actually being quite nasty to each other and one of the kids would say, “Miss, he’s calling me a – “ I’m not going to say, in language or whatever, and then – and it was obvious that there was going to be an issuer, I would say, “Right. Just for the rest of the day, we’re just speaking English, you’re not to talk in language.” And not under – yeah, to just try and keep a lid on that from – from becoming anything like fisticuffs or something, that’s all.

Would it be better, in those circumstances, to use a behaviour management approach that was directed to the particular behaviour, rather than the ..... by which they - - -?---That happened first, always, as – yeah. We have a remind, warn, act, so remind, warn, act. So you remind them to stop teasing, they say, “I’m not teasing.” How do I know whether they’re teasing or not teasing? And it’s – if you continue, you know, “I’m not teasing, he’s lying, he’s just trying to get me into trouble.” So those discussions obviously go on beforehand. That’s a last resort. You don’t want to discourage anybody from speaking in their language that’s most comfortable to them, as I wouldn’t like it either, but if you’re about to have a couple of kids punch on – you know, punch on in the classroom, then you do what’s required.

Could that be a place where the Aboriginal interpreter service might be of value to be able to use interpreters so that that might take out the edge, so to speak, of relying on the young people themselves to be able to - - -?---No.

- - - tell you about - - -?---Not practical, because it’s occurring here and there. They might be best friends tomorrow. This is just an issue that’s gone on, or they’re brought into the classroom for something that’s happened the night before. If it was an ongoing issue, absolutely, if there was an issue, but often these are just somebody has done something and they’re pissed off and they’re using the opportunity, because I don’t understand, to use language that’s not permitted in the classroom.

COMMISSIONER GOODA: Ms Coon, I raised this down in Alice Springs as well. You can see the difficulty Aboriginal people would have with that direction?---I didn’t actually – they would understand what it was for. It was in no way, Commissioner - - -

Being told not to speak their language. I hesitate to intervene here today, but I – I’ve still got to go back to saying an Aboriginal person being told not to speak in their language is pretty offensive?---Yes. I can understand why you’re saying it’s offensive, but at the same time if you’re calling someone a motherfucker and other worse things than that, and I’m about to have a punch-up in my classroom, well, I’m going to say, please don’t, you know, I can’t take your – I hear you say that it’s - - -

Mr Goodwin asked if there were any other options besides that?---And we would – as I said, we would have tried first, you know, “Don’t swear at him, don’t say this, don’t say that.” Obviously that’s what we would do, all of that beforehand. That is a last resort Commissioner, absolutely.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

I still have difficulties with it?---That’s – I understand that.

And I’m sure most Aboriginal people would?---Yeah, I understand that. It didn’t occur very often, thank goodness. Very rarely, but yeah.

MR GOODWIN: I’m moving on to a new topic. I only expect to be another 15 minutes or so, so I’m in the Commissioner’s hands.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: There are a number of people who wish to ask - - -

MR GOODWIN: There are.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: - - - Ms Coon questions.

MR GOODWIN: And for your information, there’s about – there’s five parties of a total of about an hour and a half worth of cross-examination.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you for that indication. So I think we will just try and keep normal hours if we can remember what they were.

MR GOODWIN: Of course.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Alright. We will resume then at 2 o’clock. Thank you.

ADJOURNED [1.02 pm]

RESUMED [2.07 pm]

MR GOODWIN: Ms Coon, if I can turn to the issue of behaviour management and discipline in the classroom. You mentioned in paragraph 36, and we discussed before lunch the importance of having high expectations of detainee behaviour and the importance that the school day is structured and predictable, and that behaviour expectations and rules of the school are posted and consistently enforced. Was it part of your responsibility as principal to ensure that your teachers were consistently applying particular consequences for particular behaviour across classrooms?---Yes.

And do you feel that during your time as principal that that was – that your teachers were consistent in their treatment of young people in the classroom?---For the most time, yes. Yeah, absolutely.

Were there ever times where you as principal might have to oversee potential teacher action to ensure consistency, almost acting as a bit of a check and balance on teachers?---Well, when an incident occurs in classroom, if it – if the young person is


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

removed from class, at the end of that day we have to write up an incident report, and so the staff would write – would come and see me and talk about what had occurred and then they would apply whatever – you know, just out for that day, whatever it might be, you know, can’t have his water bottle in the room. I can’t think, but – so we would talk about that together, or the senior – yes.

And so that was a way of you – and you being involved, I presume, in that process would mean that there was a constant factor of checking to ensure that there was a consistency of consequence for a particular breach of a rule?---Correct.

And do you think that worked as a system, that you as a principal working with the teacher to apply consistent measures of consequences for particular behaviour?---From my perspective, it worked.

And so shifting on to that in terms of suspensions, if we can discuss suspensions in Tivendale, was there a suspensions policy mandated by the Department of Education during your time as principal?---There is one that applies to mainstream schools, yes.

Has that applied – or has a version of that policy applied the entire time you’ve been principal?---The department’s suspension policy, yes.

Yes. So it’s - - -?---As far as I’m aware of anyway, to be fair, yeah.

So there is a general suspensions policy - - -?---Correct.

- - - mandated by the Department of Education. And I presume that that flows from the requirements under the Education Act - - -?---Yeah.

- - - regarding the circumstances in which a teacher or principal, in most circumstances, can suspend a student?---Correct.

And, in considering suspending a student, did you have regard to the requirements of the Education Act?---You have regard to it, but we’re a completely different context, as I think most people would understand. We work with, perhaps, some of the worst behaved young people in the Northern Territory in terms of behaviours and things like that, so - - -

It was earlier your evidence that a majority of students were well behaved in the classroom?---Yes. Majority, absolutely. Would agree, the majority.

I think you said the overwhelming majority?---Yes. Would agree.

So in terms of the different context, and we’ve discussed the uniqueness of the student population and of the environment at Tivendale, how does that impact on the Tivendale School’s approach to suspensions?---It doesn’t really impact on a day-to-day level.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So you still consider – so notwithstanding that you said there are – there’s a different context, ultimately the same standards would apply for a young person misbehaving in a mainstream school as there would be in Tivendale in terms of the consequences of a potential suspension?---Yes, for the most part, I would think so.

If a child is asked to leave the class for the rest of the day, do you consider that a suspension?---That’s a good point. You probably would say that was a suspension even though, you know, technically speaking I’m asking for them to be removed from the – I’m asking them to remove themselves from the classroom but, you know, it’s – I don’t know, someone may argue otherwise. In – strictly speaking it’s probably – just for that rest of the day, it’s probably not a suspension, it’s probably behaviour has got to the point where we’ve used remind, warn and act, and there’s nothing else left, “Go out now and think about it and come back again tomorrow.”

So suspension, strictly speaking, is when the student is not allowed to return to the classroom for a particular period following that incident?---Yes.

In your experience, what educational material was available to that student upon suspension? Was it similar to what we discussed in terms of young people who were classified at risk?---Yes. If the young person wanted to take their schoolwork, they could always take their schoolwork, but our experience is if you get them to take their schoolwork when you’ve just sent them out of the classroom, the schoolwork ends up in shreds, and in the bin, and the folder destroyed.

So there might be a period of time where the student requires to cool off before - - -?---Yes.

Would it again be – would the onus be on the student to request educational material post or during their suspension?---For the most part, yes. There have been times where we’ve provided their work in the office, and they just have to ask Corrections, but – and then – but for the most part if a youth worker would come and say, “Such and such might like their work,” we give them the folder and I think we have a clear plastic bag that we put in an eraser, pencil, calculator, etcetera, that will go in with it.

And was it the case that if a child was suspended they became, essentially, the responsibility of Corrections?---Correct.

So it was Corrections’ responsibility to plan their day when they were suspended?---Correct.

And those types of things. And so was there ever – would teachers ever engage directly with those young people, say when they’re locked down in their cells or otherwise occupied for the purposes of delivering education, or during a suspension was it simply the case that if they did their educational material, they could, but were otherwise wholly the responsibility - - -?---Correct.

- - - of Corrections?---Yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So it was the latter situation?---Yes. We didn’t provide teachers for young people that were suspended, very similar to what happens in a mainstream school.

Can I take you to a document in the supplementary tender bundle. This is tab 10, which are some emails between you and Ms Salli Cohen. It should be up on the screen shortly?---Okay.

Have you – if we can go to the first page of that document first, have you recently seen this email?---Yes.

And refamiliarised yourself?---Yes.

Yes. So it’s an email that you’ve forwarded to Mr Ken Middlebrook and if we can go to the start, I will briefly take you through it. You’re familiar with it, but just for the purposes of the Commissioners, there Ms Cohen sends you an email stating that she understands some of the girls have accessed Facebook at school. This is on 20 May 2015?---Yeah.

And has asked for details. You’ve reported, on the third page going up, that you’re waiting for a report from the ICT people and to review footage from the classroom and then Ms Cohen states that:

Given all the details are not clear and it also appears that staff may not have been as vigilant as what they should have been, I question the length of the suspension.

And she asked to reconsider your decision and allow the young women to return. And then you reply at the top of page 2 that:

The girls know full well what our rules and consequences are. On Tuesday, the day prior to our discovering they had been on Facebook, they had been telling the YJOs that they had done something that, if discovered, would get them expelled from school. Unlike Corrections’ rules and consequences, that have changed considerably over the past 12 months, Education’s rules and consequences have remained the same. I’m sorry, but I believe the suspension is entirely appropriate and therefore will remain.

And that’s when it becomes clear that a one week suspension has been applied?---Yep.

And then Ms Cohen replies that she’s disappointed by your reflection on the decision as it’s undergoing significant change and reform?---Yeah.

But particularly challenging:

Yes, the students are aware of consequences, though I still believe it is harsh, more so given we don’t have all the facts.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And then she requests a meeting be arranged to understand the scale applied to misbehaviour?---Yep.

And then you reply, pointing out an issue where a number of young people have been up until 2 am, and then been involved in major incidents, and then say:

You may see the consequences that I apply to detainees in my school as harsh. I see the consequences that you apply to detainees for misbehaviour is grossly inadequate. However, how you run the detention centre is none of my business. Happy to meet - - -

?---Yeah.

Continuing:

- - - and discuss further.

What did you mean by your criticism of Corrections regarding their behaviour management being “grossly inadequate”?---Well, for example, having young people be allowed to stay up to 2 am and play PlayStation, Xbox, if you do that for those two, you must do it for all, as far as I’m concerned. And if you let them stay up till 2, you know, how are they in the morning, when day shift comes on and wants to wake them up? They turn around and say, “Fuck off, I haven’t had enough sleep.” And then another incident starts. So if bedtime is 8, then bedtime must be 8. It’s just – I believe that some of Corrections’ issues come from the inconsistency of rules that apply, and to me that was just an example of that.

And so you thought there was a mismatch between the treatment, or the consistent application of rules and consequences for young people in school, compared to outside of school?---Yes.

By Corrections?---Yes.

And so was it typical, if a young person accessed a Facebook or another website that they were not allowed to access, that they would be subject to a one week suspension?---Yes. And I think the girls – I refer to it there, they knew very well what they were doing and what the penalty would be. And it’s not – can I just make it, it’s not Facebook per se, because young people engage with social media. It’s my concern that they may contact and make threats towards a victim of their crime, for example, or access an inappropriate site. I can’t trace that very well. So the inappropriate use of the computers was a big issue for me, particularly as if there was – for example, if one of the young people did threaten a victim of their crime or something like that, my main concern was that would be it then, no internet access for the school, no internet access for the young people, so I wanted to protect that, yeah.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So they would have been fully aware that that consequence could flow from them accessing Facebook?---Yes.

And would flow from that?---Yes, absolutely.

That would have been one of the rules?---Yes.

And would you apply such a suspension in a mainstream school, if a student accessed Facebook?---No. I think there are – I’ve only just started in a mainstream school in 20 years, and we have four computers and two don’t work, so I don’t know what their - - -

But if a student accessed Facebook, having been told that they were not allowed to, you wouldn’t apply - - -?---No. They wouldn’t be suspended for a week, I don’t imagine, because it doesn’t hold the same. The context is completely different. There’s not the same risks associated with young people. You know, they’re out in the community: they can see and do and speak to who they like.

So there’s a – so the different context of Tivendale meant that you would apply a harsher penalty associated with the breach of the rules?---Than a mainstream school, the answer is, yes. Of course, yes.

And do you think that’s fair?---Fair to whom?

The students?---Yes, I do, because those three that accessed that, there might be three of them, I’ve got 47 other students who need their internet access on a daily basis. So yes, I do, particularly when you know what the penalty will be, you make an active choice that, “I’m going to ignore it anyway.” That’s their choice, yeah.

Can I ask why you forwarded that email to Ken Middlebrook?---You can ask, but I’m not sure why.

You can’t remember why?---No.

You were relatively close with Mr Middlebrook?---I wouldn’t say relatively close, but we did – when we moved into the new Don Dale, we were trying to get a number of programs and things up and running. So yes, I did speak to him occasionally, yep.

But you can’t remember why you forwarded that email directly - - -?---No.

- - - to him?---No. Maybe – I don’t know, I can’t even think, maybe I was concerned that Salli was, you know, wanting to know from Ken, so I was flicking it back. I don’t know.

Just on to a final topic and that’s your role as a casual Youth Justice Officer from June 2013 to May 2014. What type of work did you undertake as a Youth Justice Officer at that time?---It was a standard duty, so depending on your shift you would


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

engage with the young people, make sure they had – you know, got up in the morning, had breakfast, you know, had showers, keep them engaged during the day.

How many shifts would you typically do?---Not very many. Mainly during the holidays or on weekends.

Outside of school times?---Yes. Absolutely, yep.

And were you ever concerned that the children would confuse your roles as a Youth Justice Officer and as principal of the school?---No.

Why?---Because they’re completely different – different roles and as a YJO there are rules and they are different to the school’s rules, obviously, and I just applied them as they – I dictated that you must apply them. So I didn’t have a concern that they would be confused. In fact, they told me more or less as such.

So they - - -?---Not all of them.

So they knew that, when you were being a YJO, there was a certain set of expectations?---Yes. One of the young people actually said to me once on shift, “Well, you’re playing by our rules now, this is – you’re working with us here.” So they clearly understood, as did I. Yes.

Now, we’ve had some evidence come out throughout the course of the Royal Commission’s hearings around what a number of people have referred to as a certain culture that arose around, particularly 2014, in terms of a bit of a boys’ culture, the idea of – of Jimmy’s Boys or the Muscle, as some of witnesses have referred to it as. Did you see a particular culture that existed at that time while you were a Youth Justice Officer?---Look, yes, I did. Yeah. But I wouldn’t call it Jimmy’s Boys or Muscle or anything like that. There were a group of, and there still is to this day, they are very close. Friendships are made within the detention centre, so the culture referred to still exists today.

How would you describe that culture?---Well, they’re friends out of work, they play sport together, or they might go fishing together, or they might know each other’s families. They might even be related.

Does that impact on their work?---Well, you’re probably asking the wrong person. You probably should ask someone from Corrections, but - - -

Well, did it – did you see it impact on their work when you were a Youth Justice Officer?---Yeah. There were occasions when I thought that, you know, that the friendship perhaps may get in the way of someone doing something, but not in a way that you would say, “Well, you’re negligent”, or, “You should have done this, but you didn’t.” Yeah. And that would be just someone, you know, late for work, for example. I’ll give you what I’m thinking of, someone coming late for work, 15 minutes late for work, and their senior might be – you know, a friend, a relative,


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

whatever. And I just think, “Well, they probably should have been pulled up for that sort of thing.” Is it because of their friendship? It may not have been. You’re asking me to make an opinion on – yeah. But that’s an example that I can think of.

And, as you’ve defined yourself, you’re a bit of a stickler for the rules, and so the seeing Youth Justice Officers have the rules inconsistently applied to them, I presume, concerned you?---Look, I’ll be honest. I didn’t give it a lot of thought, you know, it’s just that they’re things that I thought, you know, “You’re late”. You .....

But I presume you would think that the Youth Justice Officers have to model consistency if they’re to apply consistency and expect consistent behaviour of young people?---Yeah, I think we all have to. Yes.

Those are my questions, Commissioner.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you, Mr Goodwin.

MR GOODWIN: I think Mr Boulten is next, and he will be asking Ms Lee’s questions as well. She’s caught up in Katherine and unable to make it back in time.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Alright. Very well, then. Thank you. I take it you don’t feel any need, Mr Boulten, to differentiate between those questions you’re asking on behalf of NAAJA and Ms Lee? If you do then, by all means, let us know.

MR BOULTEN: Well, it won’t be apparent whose questions they were originally.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOULTEN [2.28 pm]

MR BOULTEN: So Ms Coon, my name is Phillip Boulten and I appear for NAAJA, the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agent and, for the purposes of your examination, I’m also going to ask some questions on behalf of one of NAAJAs client’s whose initials are AB?---Yep.

So you know who that person is?---I think I do, yes.

Okay. So he was the subject of a suspension for one month from the Tivendale School in February 2014?---That’s correct.

Have we got the right fellow?---Yes, we have.

Okay. So in relation to your philosophy of education, it would seem that you’re firmly of the school that says remind, warn, act, and act means consequences; is that right?---Yes.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2734 L.M. COON XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MR BOULTEN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Sometimes those consequences are removal from the classroom for the rest of the day and sometimes suspension for a longer period; is that correct?---Yes. Correct.

The feedback that you would give to the teacher concerned in the incident would take place when the teacher came to see you to write up an incident report after the event; is that right?---Most times.

And what about with the child? What feedback would you normally give the child?---During the remind, if it was a remind warn act situation, you would provide it then so they knew exactly what was going to happen.

What about after the consequence was delivered? Did you have any ongoing contact with the child then?---Yes. You would see them – yeah, most times you would see them daily anyway.

But did you ever - - -?---Yes.

- - - sit down and talk about what led to the situation, what’s the problem that they’ve got, and what is an appropriate way to deal with it in the future?---Yes. Sometimes, yes.

Are you aware of an education system which has been developed and is used in many schools and juvenile detention centres, based on the writings of Ross Greene from Harvard University called the collaborative and proactive solutions approach?---No.

Where there is a non-punitive, non-adversarial, trauma informed model that involves dialogue and recognising that there’s a problem where a child is asked to do more than they can cope with. What do you think about the idea of trying to discuss and come up, collaboratively with the child, with a solution to the problem, rather than expelling them or suspending them?---I think it’s – it might work in certain settings.

But not in a youth justice setting?---Well, not in a setting - - -

Or a detention setting; is that what you’re saying?---I’m saying, yes, I don’t think that would work in our classroom situation.

So you’re set against that type of model?---I did not say I was set - - -

In Don Dale?---I did not say I was set against.

You don’t think it would work?---No. I don’t think it would work, coming up with a decision on how we would go forward with just that individual.

So you would understand that the vast majority of your pupils are suffering from some form of cognitive impairment when they come to join your classes; correct?---Yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Whether it’s FASD, or ASD, or some sort of attention deficit disorder, or trauma-related problems; you’re aware of that?---Yes.

Many of them have hearing difficulties?---Correct.

Many of them have problems seeing well?---Correct.

You don’t get any input or much input from anybody about these children’s needs when you take on the job of teaching them, do you?---No.

You should though, shouldn’t you?---In a perfect world, yes, we’d have lots of information about them, absolutely.

Even in the real world and an imperfect human world - - -?---Yep.

- - - it would be of real worth for kids coming into Don Dale to be given comprehensive cognitive assessments, even if they’re going to be there only weeks or months; right?---I agree with you, yes.

And that should be shared with the school, shouldn’t it?---Absolutely.

And it’s that sort of information that would enable you to be able to deliver personalised teaching responses?---To a degree, yes.

Much better than at the moment where you all fly blind; right?---Yes. Well, not entirely blind though.

Yeah, I know you talk to the kids and the kids tell you they’ve been living with their grandma or something like that?---No. That wasn’t what I was referring to, I was referring to the use of the Dashboard, the student services, so if there there’s information from previous schools. But – yeah, it’s hard - - -

You highly qualified that explanation in your evidence before lunch, because most of these kids don’t go to school?---Correct. That’s right.

There’s not much on their files anyway; right?---That’s correct.

So just in relation to special needs, you’ve received some training in special needs but from your own staff. They went off and had a - - -?---Trauma informed practice PD.

Trauma informed - - -?---Yep.

- - - course and then they came back and they told everybody else, including you, what they’d learned at their – what, one or two day course; is that right?---Correct.

Your school is a very special, special needs school, isn’t it?---It is.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Do any of the staff at your school have postgraduate qualifications in special needs education?---Not that I’m aware of, no.

Have they ever done?---Not that I’m aware of.

Are you aware that in other States and Territories in Australia it is either highly regarded or mandatory that special needs teachers have a special degree and formal qualification to teach special needs students?---No.

Do you think you should have specialised training to teach the kids you teach?---I think it would be very valuable, yes.

Have you ever enrolled in any such program?---No.

Are you going to?---No.

You intend to go back and be the principal of this school in a few months; is that right?---I’ve actually applied for another 12 months leave without pay.

Alright. In all the time that you were the principal of the school, or teaching there in any capacity, there’s only been one child that’s been granted any special funding for special needs care; right?---Correct.

And that’s Dylan Voller; right?---Correct. Yes.

And even then, you had to pull out all stops to convince the department to give you money; right?---Correct.

And we’ve seen – we’ve seen some correspondence, I hope not to waste time putting it up on the screen, but you - - -?---I’ve seen it.

You got a lot of backing from a lot of people, but you had to keep going hard to get the money; right?---Yes.

You met with an attitude, if I can call it that, that the department would not normally fund special needs funding for particular students who are being held in detention; right?---That was the attitude of one person, yes, correct. That told me that that was correct, yep.

She was a significant decision-maker in relation to the funding; right?---Sorry, I’m not sure who – who told me that we’re not going to provide funding because it said that, “Yes, he’s been entitled to it previously, but while he’s in detention he’s not going to get it.” I’m sorry, I can’t remember who that was.

Well, I’m not going to mention their names either, but one of the people you dealt with - - -?---Yep.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

- - - gave you every reason to believe that this was the reason why Voller couldn’t get special funding; right?---Yes, because he was in detention. That’s correct, that’s what I was told.

Yes. And that’s what triggered all of the references that you got to try and assist further the application?---Yes. Correct.

That’s not right, is it? You can’t – you can’t just make a rule to discriminate against kids just because they’re in detention, surely?---I think that when I raised that – I think you’ll see from the other emails that was actually some surprise from the department that I had been given that advice anyway, and that it was wrong, and that he was entitled to it.

Well, actually what happened is somebody actually raised the possibility that this would be contrary to the antidiscrimination legislation; right?---That’s right, yes.

So it was a threat of litigation, or the consequences flowing from a breach of the Act, which changed the attitude; right?---Probably, yes.

So how come Dylan Voller is the only person that you’ve ever sought to get funding for an assistant in the classroom?---Because we haven’t needed it as such to that – yes.

But you see, you’ve told the Commission - - -?---Yes.

- - - how your school cohort included, for instance, half a dozen or more of the most difficult and uncontrollable kids in the Northern Territory?---Yes.

And they were difficult to handle too, weren’t they?---Behaviour-wise.

Yes, and they were difficult – or you actually don’t know what disabilities they had, did they – do you?---No.

And funding for special education purposes is not based on criteria concerning behaviour in school, whether you sit up straight, don’t swear, don’t look on Facebook. It’s all about disability, isn’t it?---Yes.

So why have you not tried to get more funding for in class assistance for people who you know must be disabled?---Because the great majority are on remand and I believe – and I don’t know how long I have them for, but also I haven’t felt that we’ve needed that.

You deal with it normally by remind, warn, act and suspend; right?---Yes.

I would suggest to you that that sort of punitive approach is old fashioned education. What do you say about that?---I say it works in our classroom. That’s why they’re exceptionally well behaved.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So do you think that they’re exceptionally well behaved in your classrooms because they are kept active all day? Do you think that helps?---I think it helps that the curriculum is targeted towards the young people and that they actually know there’s people working with them that support them and expect that they can do well and encourage them, yes.

When they are suspended - - -?---Yes.

- - - they do not have the benefit of that sort of focus, do they?---No, they don’t.

And they are, especially if they are in the BMU or in a high risk cell - - -?---Yep.

- - - their sensory needs are almost entirely shut down, aren’t they?---In the back cells?

In the back cells; right?---Yes, in the back cells, yes.

And even kids who are naughty and get sent out for looking up Facebook or whatever, when they go back to their normal bedroom, there’s nothing for them to do in the period in which they are on suspension from school, is there?---Well, that’s up to Corrections, in the case of those young girls, because they were – all of those girls left, they had a staff member there that didn’t have to come to school. So they had staff in their block.

But Ms Coon - - -?---Yes.

- - - that must inform your decision-making about whether the consequences are proportionate or not, surely?---Well, again, I don’t want to lose internet access for the other children across the school that are doing the right thing. They made the active choice to do the wrong thing, despite knowing what the consequence was.

In relation to the young fellow AB - - -?---Yes.

- - - he was suspended for a month; right?---Correct.

Mr Sizeland has given evidence before the Commission at page 1983 that he formed the view that the one month suspension was excessive in his case, and he went to you and asked you to reconsider. Do you accept that happened?---I don’t remember it, but yes, it probably did, yes.

He says that he also got support from Mr Caldwell on the issue. Do you accept that that happened?---I can’t remember that, but if that’s what he says I’ve got no – no doubt – no reason to doubt him.

I suggest to you that you rejected the approach that was made on behalf of the detainee by those who were detaining him?---Yes.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

You wouldn’t move; right?---Correct.

What can a detainee do at all to get back into class during the course of the suspension?---Nothing. The course of the suspension stays.

So what review process is there for your apparently arbitrary decision that one month or one week is appropriate for the activity?---I’m not following you.

What review process is there for your decision to suspend?---Review by whom?

I’m asking if there’s one at all?---No.

So a senior Youth Justice Officer, the Commissioner for Corrections, the Minister, nobody could influence you if you’ve already made the decision; is that right?---Well, I’ve never been asked by the Minister, as far as I know, so - - -

But it wouldn’t make any difference to you, surely?---I don’t know. It’s never happened.

If the detainees or let’s call them – if your pupils’ behaviour improves, say, during the course of a month whilst on suspension, that would make no difference either, apparently; is that right?---That’s correct.

When somebody’s in the BMU, serving out a school suspension, if the child asks for it, they then are offered a school pack; right?---Yes. They can have their schoolwork.

But you would never ever send a teacher there to talk to them; is that right?---No. I don’t know if we have. I can’t recall. It’s not something I would do commonly, no.

And you can’t remember ever doing it?---No. Personally, I’ve spoken to young people, yes, they’ve asked to speak to me afterwards. Yes.

But it’s a rare occurrence even for you by the sounds of it; is that right?---No. It wasn’t that rare, sometimes they want – you know, “Can Ms Coon come down?” It would be – it certainly wouldn’t be a lot of the time, no.

In paragraph 21 of your statement you said that – well, it’s the major statement. I don’t know which is 308 and which is 307, but it’s the one that you’ve been referred to throughout your evidence today. You’ve said that you’ve been responsible for ensuring many initiatives and programs through services delivered by a number of non-government organisations including NAAJA?---Correct.

And you said that you arranged to deliver those programs to the detainees; right?---Correct.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So the program of lectures and discussion seminars delivered to your students by NAAJA has become a very big problem, hasn’t it?---Not for me.

No, because you – you shut it down, didn’t you?---I did.

You shut it down - - -?---I didn’t shut the program down. I didn’t shut the program down, that is incorrect. NAAJA were told they could continue to run the program. They could continue to run it during school time, and they could continue to run it in the classrooms, the only difference would be that teachers would not facilitate is. That Corrections workers would be in the classroom with them.

You worked together with Corrections to make sure they didn’t allow it too, didn’t you?---I beg your pardon.

Didn’t you?---Absolutely not. Where are you getting that from?

Okay. So let’s have a look at some of the correspondence about it. Could the witness please be shown annexure E to Andreea Lachsz’s statement, which was exhibit 105.006. So this email was sent to Ms Lachsz the day after a seminar at Tivendale School; right?---Correct.

So were you present and listening to what happened during the delivery of that - - -?---No.

- - - seminar? So you don’t know what was said or what was done?---Exactly, no.

Have you seen Ms Lachsz’s statement about this issue?---Yes.

You know that she says that teachers and Youth Justice Officers were making inappropriate comments throughout the course of - - -?---I saw that, yes.

And you know that the subject matter of this seminar was the rights of children who are being detained in Don Dale?---Correct.

You knew, didn’t you, that this very seminar, or one based on the same content, had been previously delivered to people at your school?---Absolutely.

With no trouble whatsoever; is that right?---Correct.

Before you sent this email, did you ask NAAJA to explain what had happened in the seminar that day?---No.

Did you think that that was an appropriate thing to do?---No.

Or a fair thing to do?---No.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

You’ve got a very clear sense of justice, by the sound of it?---No, I just – it was the way our relationship with NAAJA had been heading and so it was – this was like the straw that broke the camel’s back, I guess I would think.

Okay?---Yeah.

So you would agree, wouldn’t you, that children in detention ought to know - - -?---Absolutely.

- - - how to deal with issues appropriately, through the proper channels, rather than smashing things, rioting and carrying on like maniacs?---Absolutely. Yep.

Right. So you might think that it’s important for them to be pointed in the right direction by people who are apparently simpatico with them; right?---Correct.

But you didn’t think that was an important enough consideration before you sent the email of 19 June?---No, that’s incorrect.

Okay. So following your email of 19 June - - -?---My issue with NAAJA wasn’t the - - -

I haven’t asked you about that. Someone else might, but - - -?---I was referring to this email that you asked me about.

Okay, well what - - -?---Thank you.

Tell us what your issue is?---I was just going to say it wasn’t about the topic of the lecture or talk or anything, it wasn’t about their rights in education. That was not the issue. They had previously delivered it and yeah, that’s not the issue.

Well, I haven’t heard what it is. What is it? What was the issue?---The issue was the asking and taking down complaints from the kids and writing down you know, “I found a toe anyway in my food, I found a screw in my – “ I just felt if NAAJA wanted to speak to the kids about that, it could be done in a different forum. It made the education staff extremely uncomfortable. Over the course of that day, from three different classrooms – and NAAJA are aware of this because I spoke to them about that, the staff came in very upset and very frustrated by NAAJAs approach. They felt it was quite – it was in some ways stirring the kids. I mean, in the context of what was happening at that time – it’s difficult out of context, but in the context of what was happening in the detention centre at that time, yeah, they felt that it was inflaming relations.

So there had been a lot of difficulties in that period, but - - -?---There were, yes.

- - - you mentioned this morning about the incident that occurred shortly after everyone moved back into Berrimah, the new Don Dale?---I think that was G Block; correct.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So Ms Lachsz has suggested that in January 2015, shortly after you moved back in - - -?---Yes.

- - - you told her that the high security youths didn’t deserve a treat?---The chocolate, correct.

The chocolates, but you also added that you had decided not to run school - - -?---Not school.

Not run school during the - - -?---Incorrect.

You told her that you decided not to extend the school program during the holiday period?---Yes, the holiday program.

The holiday program. This is the school holiday program; right?---Correct. Corrections ran it.

You withdrew your – well, you run a 45 week school year; is that right?---Yes, we do, yep.

So was the shutting down of the school holiday program a reduction in the numbers of weeks delivering services at Tivendale?---No, because it’s PlayStation and movies and chess and checkers and art. It’s a holiday program, and Corrections run it. I provided the classroom or the normal checkers and chess and things they would have, just not a staff member. We were short staffed at that time, so yes.

But you’ve suggested to the NAAJA lawyer - - -?---Yep.

- - - that you did it because the kids didn’t deserve it. Is that right or not right?---That would probably be something I’d say, actually.

So - - -?---Probably that I didn’t think, and without – not deserve it, but in light – in the context again, which you probably wouldn’t have told her then, but in being short staffed and not having staff and given that they removed only – I don’t even know the date, but maybe two weeks before, because of rioting again, and I had been on my knees scrubbing the floors, scrubbing walls, getting rid of rubbish. So yeah, in the context – and then they come over and rioted in G Block within a week as well, I had pretty much just about had enough.

Well, you were taking it very hard, weren’t you?---No, not hard. Not hard. It’s not a personal issue.

It was a personal issue, wasn’t it?---It’s not a – no, it’s not – it’s not me personally. It’s that – look, if they want to choose to riot and destroy things, etcetera, and act badly, there are consequences for that, and if I wasn’t – I was going to be – step into the classroom and run the holiday program when we had just moved, I didn’t even


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

know if we had our files or anything yet. So I had other things to do so I have said, “Yep, no, Corrections can run that.”

So I just wanted to check what the answer was to the question you not running the program that year, was that time out of the 45 week - - -?---No, they still had the program run. I just didn’t do it.

No. Please listen?---Okay.

You, at the school - - -?---Mmm.

- - - conducted 45 weeks of education in the period 2014 and 2015; is that right?---That’s correct.

So you would have included the holiday program as part of that; right?---That’s correct.

So that’s one or two weeks less that you provided by way of education during that year?---It wasn’t education, it’s a holiday program, but correct.

And you did it in part because they’d rioted; is that right?---Yes.

Six of them?---Those six.

Yes?---Yep.

What about all the other kids?---What - - -

What did they do wrong?---What other kids?

All the other ones that were going to get the benefit of your holiday program?---They did get the benefit of the – of course, they all go it.

But not delivered by you?---Yes, they did.

By someone else?---I’m sorry, you’ve got it actually wrong. I was referring just to those six in HSU.

Okay?---That’s what I mean by short staffed.

The HSU kids?---I apologise if I wasn’t – yes. The holiday program run everywhere else, it was just there. I concentrated on packing up boxes, I think, and moving files and Corrections, I gave them all our resources, they had the classroom. Yeah.

You’re aware, are you not, that following your decision concerning the NAAJA rights lectures, NAAJA made a complaint about it to the Children’s Commissioner; you know that?---I do, and they weren’t entirely honest.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Is that right? Who was being dishonest?---Well, I think – I can’t see it here, but I think they made no reference to the fact that the program could continue, just that we wouldn’t facilitate. There was no mention to the Commissioner that I’d said they could have the classroom, have the kids, they could run it as they would, it just wouldn’t be facilitated by education staff: it would be facilitated by Corrections staff.

So you’re aware, are you not, that the Children’s Commissioner assessed the complaint and on the basis of that assessment and an undertaking that the staff at your school would be formally reminded of your obligations to uphold the values of the code in – code of conduct, in the carriage of your professional duties, no further action was taken. You’re aware of that?---Yes. Yeah. I haven’t got it, but yes.

So did anyone actually sit down with you from the Department of Education and talk to you about your obligations to uphold the values of the code of conduct?---Yes.

Who was it and what did they say?---It was Sue Healey by phone and Marion Guppy face to face.

Right. And what did they say?---I don’t recall a lot. We talked about our relationship with NAAJA.

Yes?---I remember being asked who initiated.

Yes?---And how long it had been running, and I remember Marion suggesting that the school should re-run the program in school time. But when I actually made it clear to her that the offer was still standing, that NAAJA could still run the program exactly the same, they would just have different people in the program, that is not teachers but YJOs, as are there anyway, so it would just be the teachers walking out. Yep.

Teachers would walk out?---No. No. I mean, the teachers wouldn’t walk out. We wouldn’t be there. I’m saying the program would look for all intents and purposes and run exactly the same. There just would not be education staff present.

Going back to this document on the screen, annexure E, you said in the final paragraph of your email to NAAJA:

Note: we will not be scheduling any more “educational” sessions with NAAJA during school time in the future.

Do you see that?---I do.

Continuing:

And, should NAAJA wish to speak to detainees, go through Corrections.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Right?---Correct.

Could we look at exhibit 105.010 up on the screen, please. Now, down towards – two-thirds towards the bottom of that page that’s on the screen, you can see there an email from the chief executive officer of NAAJA to Mr Middlebrook. Do you see that?---Yes, I do.

And other people are copied in, but not you; right?---Correct.

And halfway down the screen there, it’s – it notes that:

We discussed at a meeting that we had with Lisa Coon on 19 June –

sorry:

We discussed the meeting we had with Lisa Coon on 19 June and expressed our disappointment with the meeting and Lisa being adamant that they would not be scheduling any more educational sessions with NAAJA during school time in the future.

And you agree you said – you gave that message; right?---Yes.

That was sent to Mr Middlebrook; correct?---Yes.

Did you speak with Mr Middlebrook, or communicate with him, about NAAJAs participation in educational programs through Corrections?---No. Not that I can recall.

..... about that?---Look, I can’t recall. So before I say no, I should – I have no – no memory. I can’t recall, I’m sorry.

Okay. So could the witness please be shown the document which is tab 11 on the supplementary tender bundle that was tendered this morning.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Actually, I think that Mr Goodwin needs to tender it.

MR GOODWIN: Yes, I do.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Would it be a good idea to do that now?

MR GOODWIN: I think so, Commissioner, yes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you. That’s exhibit 309.

EXHIBIT #309 EMAIL FROM MR MIDDLEBROOK TO LISA COON


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

MR BOULTEN: The bottom half of the page, Mr Middlebrook sent, there’s an email from Mr Middlebrook to you, and in the second paragraph of it, he said:

I wanted to give you a call also and say thank you for your email to NAAJA.

So you copied him in on an email to NAAJA; right?---Yes. I must have, yeah.

And he said I’m a little - - -?---Or someone else sent it to me.

Okay:

I’m a little over that organisation.

..... said:

Whilst I understand their advocacy role, they do nothing to assist with managing a difficult group of young people. I’m actually considering what levels of access that we will allow for these organisations to have as, the more open we try to be with them, the more they turn it against us.

Do you see that?---Yes, I can see that.

Okay. So you’re at this time suggesting, well, it would be Corrections that would allow the NAAJA rights seminars to be facilitated; is that right?---Not at this time. Prior to this I did, yeah.

Okay. So what was your attitude to Mr Middlebrook’s expression of opinion in this particular instance?---I can’t remember.

Did you agree with him? Did you like what he had to say?---Yes, I did agree with him. I did think they were quite – yeah.

You said at the top of the page, in your email in response:

NAAJA overstepped their boundaries during what should have been an information and educational session. I had no problem addressing this issue with it. It’s unfortunate, but I see them as no more than adversarial agitators at the present time, interested in pursuing their own political agenda. Our school is not the place for this to occur.

?---Correct.

So that would mean there would be no political agitation by NAAJA in your school room; is that right?---Well, not the way that they behaved, no. If they wanted to speak to young people about conditions in there, it should be done in a different – yes, it wasn’t an information .....


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Well, like where? Where do you – where did you have in mind at this time?---I don’t have anything in mind, but there’s conference rooms, there’s - - -

Right?---Yes.

So not back in your classroom?---No, they could use a classroom, I’ve already told you that.

Okay?---And I told NAAJA that. In fact, they did come back and use the classroom.

Not to deliver that program?---That would be NAAJAs – I don’t know what they delivered.

You’ve been away for a year, haven’t you?---Yes.

So what I would suggest to you is that you and Mr Middlebrook were reaching a sympathetic agreement that it might be good to lock NAAJA out of the Don Dale facility altogether. What do you say about that?---I say that’s ridiculous.

So would the witness please be shown document number 11 – sorry, it’s actually document 12 in the supplementary tender bundle. So you see at the bottom of the page there’s another email from the chief executive officer of NAAJA to Mr Williams, and Ms Cohen is copied in. Do you see that?---The bottom one, yes.

And in that Ms Collins, the CEO, raised again the problems that arose at Tivendale with this program; right?---Yes.

And she wanted a meeting. Do you see that?---Can I just read it.

“Request a meeting with you and our NAAJA representatives.” Do you see that?--- .....

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Perhaps just give Ms Coon an opportunity to read right through it, Mr Boulten.

MR BOULTEN: Certainly.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

MR BOULTEN: So Ms Cohen sent an email to Mr Middlebrook at 8.43, “Is there a particular direction you wish us to take with the – “ below. Do you see that?---Yes.

And he answered:

I’m not really keen to work with NAAJA at all. They have not really done anything for us other than to create difficulties.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Do you see that?---Yes.

He said:

I support Lisa’s stand on this issue and, unless they can demonstrate a greater level of professionalism, they’re not coming in.

See that?---Yes, I do.

So did you talk this over with Mr Middlebrook?---No, not that I recall.

He’s not talking about not coming into the school. He’s not talking about limiting NAAJAs access to deliver a particular program. He’s talking about not letting them in the gate; right?---Correct. Until a greater level of professionalism is displayed.

So do you regard yourself as displaying a great degree of professionalism in your dealings with the children at your school?---I’m not sure I understand.

Are you professional in the way that you deal with the kids?---I would like to think so.

At Tivendale?---Yes.

And do you regard them the way a teacher should regard them?---Yes, I think so.

You know that I’m going to ask you about some Facebook posts of your own; right?---Absolutely.

Alright. They’re not very professional, are they?

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Just before you get onto this subject.

MR BOULTEN: Yes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Is that an exhibit, Mr Goodwin, that Mr Boulten has just referred to, that is supplementary tender bundle document number 12?

MR GOODWIN: No, they are not in the supplementary tender bundle. I will need to tender them separately.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Do that now.

MR GOODWIN: Yes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Exhibit 310, thank you.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

EXHIBIT #310 FACEBOOK POSTS BY LISA COON

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Sorry, Mr Boulten, we just need to keep it tidy.

MR BOULTEN: That’s fine. Could the witness see up on the screen the first Facebook post, NAA.003.0012.003. You posted this one up, didn’t you?---I did.

And it’s a comment that you’ve added to a news item concerning Mr Lawrence’s public statement about issues concerning youth justice; right?---I can’t even remember what that one was about, so I will have to take your word for that.

Well, what you’ve said is:

Lord Farquaad standing on his box beating his wee chest again.

Do you see that?---Yes, I do.

And then a little bit further down:

You mean just like your fellow lawyers at NAAJA used Four Corners to stir up public emotion that started the whole taxpayer funded Royal Commission.

Do you see that?---I do.

Seems like the shoe might be on the other foot now.

Right?---Yes.

So Lord Farquaad, we’ve done some research, seems to be the evil character or Grinch who’s - - -?---No.

What’s the name of it?---It’s Shrek.

Shrek. But he’s evil, isn’t he?---He’s a dictator, I think. Yeah.

He’s a dictator. Got it. So what you’re suggesting here is that this dictator in the photograph is stirring up trouble, there’s a public reaction against him and now the boot’s on the other foot because NAAJA had stirred up Four Corners to get a taxpayer funded Royal Commission up and off the ground; is that right?---That’s what I’ve written; correct.

And did you write that expecting that you might go back to the Tivendale School as the principal one day?---No.

So could you – could the witness be shown another one of these Facebook posts, NAA.0003.0012.001. This is your reaction in January this year to a Channel Nine


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

news article about more break and enters having huge damage bills for local business owners?---Correct.

Where you commented:

The NT government is too scared at the moment to take any stricter measure against young offenders because of the Royal Commission. This is a fact, and you can thank NAAJA for that.


Why did you say that?---Which part of that?

Any of it?---Because that’s how I feel.

Right. And do you think it’s appropriate for the principal of the Tivendale School to publicly message this sort of message?---I wasn’t principal at the school at that time.

Sorry, are you not on leave?---I am on leave, yes, correct.

Is your position - - -?---No, you’re correct.

- - - still in place?---Yes.

Alright. So could the witness be shown NAA.0003.0012.004, please. And this is another one of your Facebook posts in response to a news item on Channel Nine about compensation that had been paid to a number of NAAJA clients as a result of proceedings in the Supreme Court regarding issues that occurred during the gassing incident in August 2014; right?---Correct.

Where you said:

So will that $53,000 be given back to the NT government to repay the hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage those same juveniles caused to the infrastructure at Don Dale during their escapes and riots.

Is that right?---That’s correct, yes.

You thought it was inappropriate that they get the money; is that right?---Yes, that is right.

And you formed the view that these people were unworthy of being successful litigants in the Supreme Court; is that right?---Yes. That would be right.

These are your students, remember? These are the ones that - - -?---I know who they are.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And you – these are people that you have responsibility, as if you are a parent to them, when they are under your care; right?---Yes.

Okay. So could you have a look, please, at the final one I wish to show you, which is all the same numbers but it’s 0002 at the end. And this is a Channel Nine News article in February this year where the news broadcast dealt with a crime spree that had happened overnight where three teenage girls had been arrested stealing an old lady’s car. And you said in relation to that:

Come on. These are just poor vulnerable children who need our support!!

With two exclamation marks:

Or better still, just millions of dollars payouts after they continue to riot, assault, and destroy property whilst in detention.


So that was your view then; right?---Yes.

Did you hold those views when the kids were in the Tivendale School in January 2015?---Yes.

Okay. Have you reconsidered your position as principal of the Tivendale School?---I’m not sure what you - - -

Should give it up, shouldn’t you? It’s not appropriate for you to go back there and be the principal, is it?---I think it’s highly appropriate.

MS KATHRAKIS: In my submission, that’s an inappropriate question.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Would you like to say why.

MS KATHRAKIS: To go as far as to say that she – forgive me, I didn’t get the exact wording, to say that it’s inappropriate for her to hold that position, in my submission, is inappropriate.

MR BOULTEN: If we get a chance to make submissions to the Royal Commission we will be making a submission that this witness should not be the principal of the school.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: So you’re giving - - -

MR BOULTEN: Yes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Ms Coon an opportunity to respond to that submission which might likely occur.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

MR BOULTEN: Yes.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: I think in those circumstances it’s an entitlement for Ms Coon to respond if she wishes to do so.

MS KATHRAKIS: Thank you, Commissioner.

THE WITNESS: I think a person, including myself as principal, can also have views, a public opinion or an opinion and I don’t agree, and I still don’t agree and I will stand by that, that they should have been paid money when there are victims of crimes and people that are out of pocket or have been damaged, and that’s where it should go. I do hold that view publicly.

MR BOULTEN: And privately. And it didn’t impact at all when you were setting the consequences for things like swearing in class or looking up Facebook or anything like that; right?---That’s professionally, that’s all about school, then.

This is not professional, is it?---It’s my public opinion.

That’s all I wish to ask.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you, Mr Boulten.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GOODHAND [3.16 pm]

MS GOODHAND: Ms Coon, my name’s Goodhand, I represent Dylan Voller. Do you have a copy of your statement? Perhaps paragraph 52 of the statement could be brought up, please. I will come to that?---Okay.

Just before that comes up, so as I understand it from your statement and from the evidence you’ve given today, if a child is placed in isolation, in detention, they’re not permitted to attend school?---That – I’m not – are you saying if they’re in the BMU?

That’s right?---Yeah. I don’t – I can’t recall an incident where someone’s been allowed to leave the BMU to come to school. I can’t recall that.

But that decision for them not to attend school is a decision of Corrections, not education?---If – are you talking about if they’re at risk?

No, if they’re on a BMU placement?---Yes, that’s correct.

They’re placed in isolation?---Yes.

And that’s something that you wouldn’t as the principal or teacher of the school have any jurisdiction over that decision?---No.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2753 L.M. COON XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MS GOODHAND

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And then similarly, if a child is placed at risk - - -?---Yes.

- - - they wouldn’t be allowed to attend school either, whilst they were at risk?---I can’t recall them ever attending school.

And in terms of placing someone at risk, you appreciate the difference between that and a BMU or an isolation placement?---Absolutely.

So a measure to place someone at risk might be taken if the detainee has expressed some self-harm?---That’s usually the reason, yes.

And if – it could also be applied if they were suffering from a potentially harmful medical condition?---Can you give me an example, please?

Well, maybe I will come back to that. Certainly it’s not – you were also a Corrections officer, weren’t you. At one time you were a superintendent at Wildman; is that right?---No, deputy super, Wildman, but yes, I’ve been – worked for Corrections.

And you were also a casual Youth Justice Officer between June 2013 and May 2014; correct?---Yeah. Not sure of the dates, but - - -

During that period of time there may have been children that were placed at risk?---Yes.

So you would have been familiar with the correctional services at risk procedures manual?---Yes. Not off the top of my head though, but yeah, you can access them and, yeah.

Now, in terms of your statement, if we can go to paragraph 51, you say there that my client’s non-attendance at Tivendale school was:

..due to his habitual and persistent oppositional and belligerent behaviour towards Corrections staff.

Do you see that?---Yes, I do.

But if my client was placed at risk, for example, that wouldn’t be because he chose not to go to school, would it?---At risk?

If he was at risk - - -?---Yeah.

- - - he doesn’t have a choice as to whether he can go to school, does he?---No.

So if he was at risk numerous times then, on those occasions at least, he wouldn’t have had a say as to whether he can go to school?---No. You’re correct.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And then if he was placed in isolation, and Corrections didn’t allow him to go to school, it wouldn’t be a matter whether he refused to go to school, would it?---No.

If he was placed in isolation numerous times then on those times it wouldn’t be because he refused to go to school, would it?---That’s correct.

So it’s not correct then at paragraph 51 when you say, “All my client’s non-attendances”, is it?---Sorry, where? Sorry, what am I reading?

Dylan Voller’s – paragraph 51:

Dylan Voller’s non-attendance at Tivendale School was due to his habitual and persistent oppositional and belligerent behaviour.

That’s not quite correct, is it?---No. That’s generally correct, yes.

Notwithstanding that you’ve just accepted if he was at risk he would have no choice – if he’s at risk, it’s not because of his oppositional behaviour, is it, you would expect that would be - - -?---No. But usually he went at risk because of the behaviour.

So you say if he was placed at risk, because he genuinely expressed self-harm, and a decision was made to take that measure, that that’s because he wasn’t genuine; is that right?---Sorry?

So you’re saying that when he’s placed at risk, because he’s expressed ideas of self-harm or that she might hurt himself, that that’s because he made it up?---Sorry, I’m not following.

So when he’s placed at risk - - -?---Yes.

- - - do you accept that on some occasions at least it’s genuine?---Yes, yes, yes.

That he may have expressed that he might harm himself?---Expressed ..... yes.

So on those occasions it wasn’t because he was being oppositional, was it?---No, not on those.

And if it happened a number of times, then each of those – those times he was placed at risk, it’s not because he was oppositional, is it?---No.

There might be something wrong?---Yes, there might be. Yes, correct.

Now, as a principal in a community school – if you can answer this?---Yes.

If a child did not attend school, is that something that would concern you?---Yes. And that is the situation.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And if that happened on repeated occasions, that would concern you even more, wouldn’t it?---Yes.

So if a child doesn’t attend school in detention, is that something that concerns you?---If they’re refusing, yes.

So, sorry, you say if they’re refusing. Do you draw some distinction there?---No. Well, because we – most of the kids attend school, and only if they refused to attend.

So if they weren’t refusing to attend, and they didn’t attend school, is that something that would concern you?---If they – yes, I’d want to know why they wouldn’t want to be at school.

And if that happened on a continuous basis or a lot of times, is that something that would concern you at all?---Yes, I’d want to know why they didn’t want to attend school, yes.

And certainly you accept, don’t you, that you have a duty or a responsibility to find out why a child wouldn’t be attending? And you’re also aware, aren’t you, of your obligations under the Care and Protection of children Act in the Northern Territory in terms of mandatory reporting?---Yes.

And so if a child wasn’t attending school on a continuous basis and you weren’t aware – you – it wasn’t because the child was refusing, is that something that would arouse your suspicion in terms of that Act?---In the community?

In detention?---Sorry?

In detention?---Yes.

If a child continuously doesn’t turn up to school - - -?---Yes.

- - - does section – well, does your mandatory reporting obligations come into it - - -?---No, because - - -

- - - in terms of pointing out what’s going on?---No, because I would be told why they weren’t at school.

And who would you be told by?---I would either be told by – if it’s come in that day and someone’s name wasn’t on the – there’s a daily attendance record, and down the bottom there would be those not attending there’s usually a reason there, and that allows me to ask the senior on shift or whoever, the case worker or – of why they’re not attending.

Were you concerned that my client’s nonattendance – number of nonattendances at school was because of another reason, other than refusal to attend school?---Sorry?


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Well, in your statement you say that my client didn’t attend school because he refused to attend on numerous occasions?---Yes.

At any time, and I’m talking just the period my client was in youth detention?---Yes.

So 2009 to 2015. At any time while he was at Don Dale and you were at Don Dale - - -?---Yes.

- - - did you have any concerns about his continuous or numerous lack of attendances at school?---No.

Are you able to say why you didn’t have any concerns?---Because Dylan didn’t want to attend. He would tell me, “School’s fucking boring”, or this or that, because I would sometimes go past, “Dylan, you are coming to school today?” But yeah, I think he found it irrelevant or, I’m not sure.

But if you were aware – I’m not saying you are for the purposes of this question but if you are aware of my client being placed at risk on numerous occasions, would that not concern you?---Of course, it concerns me when any of the young people are placed at risk.

But you weren’t concerned during the time my client was at Don Dale?---No, that’s – you’re saying that I’m not concerned.

I’m suggesting that to you?---No. Any young person that threatens self-harm and attempts to go through with that is very concerning, anybody.

And just in terms of – you seem to draw some distinction between being a 17 year old in your statement. I just want to ask you, are you aware of the United Nations Convention on the - - -?---Rights of the Child.

- - - Rights of the Child?---Yes.

And you’re aware that applies - - -?---Correct.

- - - not just to under 17 year olds?---Yes.

So that would apply to someone in detention that was say 17 years - - -?---Correct.

- - - and five months?---Yes.

And you say you’re aware of that. Are you familiar with article 28 of that Convention?---No, I don’t know what you’re referring to, I’m sorry.

So what I want to suggest to you is that that provides a right for a child to education?---I never denied Dylan Voller an education or the right to an education. What I didn’t allow Dylan Voller to do was to attend the school.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

So back to my question?---Yep.

That provides a right for a child to education. Also in that article, article 28, and if it’s easier to follow I can give you the number. It’s witness.0009.0001.0054 and it’s page 8. That right, at 28(c), also extends to providing higher education to children. Are you aware of that?---I can’t – sorry?

Sorry, I will wait for it to come up?---Thank you. Excuse me, can I get another water, please?

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Certainly?---Thank you. Thanks very much.

MS GOODHAND: Okay. So at page 8, specifically in relation to article 28. So you see there 28(c) – I’ll go back one step, sorry, you see there, 28(c) it says there’s a right for a child and education should be accessible?---Correct.

On the basis of capacity. And then at 28, 2, it states that, “The appropriate measures to ensure – “ so if you just read that. So you were aware of that in general terms?---In general terms, yes.

And your awareness of that applies to the time my client was in custody?---Yes.

And certainly when you arranged for Mr Calma’s assistance for my client, that would have been something that you had in mind, arranging alternatives to the mainstream education?---Sorry?

So instead of providing the usual classroom environment education, in my client’s case you came up with a solution, an alternative?---Yes.

And the alternative was to help him get an education, but in a way that didn’t - - -?---Well, it was just to get him back in the classroom initially, to be quite honest, was just to be in there and stay in there. So that was how that was attempted initially. But yes, he was still doing literacy and numeracy, and things like that, correct.

When he was doing that with Mr Calma he was actually doing quite well. It was working?---He did well, yeah.

And I think your evidence before, you tried very hard to put that arrangement in place, and then at paragraph 60 of your statement you say my client stopped due to his behaviour. Isn’t it the case that, after two months with Mr Calma, my client was transferred back to Alice Springs?---I – if you’re telling me that, I will have to accept that.

So you accept then it wasn’t due to his behaviour ..... Mr Calma?---No, actually. No, I’m terribly sorry. I remember, no, what happened was Dylan smashed up his


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

room, and he was placed on a management program with Corrections, and that’s why it ceased, but again I don’t have access to those documents.

And so at no other time while my client’s in custody do you recall any such plan being put in place, apart from this plan?---No.

And is there a reason for that?---I think he wasn’t attending, consistency, and he indicated he didn’t want to attend school.

But if the case was - - -?---Yes.

- - - unlike what you’re suggesting, if the case was that he was placed at risk on numerous occasions?---Yes.

Would it not have been appropriate to try and arrange some alternative for him to get access to education?---I actually asked about that but we weren’t allowed to have anyone go in with them.

And who told you that?---Corrections.

Do you remember the person at Corrections that told you that?---I don’t, no, because I remember having the argument, not the argument, but with the department, because they said that the aid needed to go with him. No, actually might have been my – my decision as well, and I took them in to show them the damage that he’d done in there and suggested it, you know, wouldn’t necessarily be safe for them. And if I didn’t feel comfortable working one on one with him in there, then I wasn’t going to ask any other teacher to.

And were there any other alternatives explored in terms of providing one on one education, say not in person by Skype or something of that nature with my client?---During which period?

The period he was in – at Don Dale specifically .....?---We enrolled him in NTOEC. That was at Holtze. So we explored enrolling in secondary education, which we actually did and provided that, but he ripped that up and threw that away. Then, when he came back, he was out of school – he was involved in a lot of the riots and things that were happening in there, so I think he was in C Block and, yes, there was no education occurring in C Block with those six or seven detainees.

But NTOEC has got nothing to do with you as the principal of Tivendale?---You asked me what other programs I – sorry.

There is a follow-up question I’m asking you: NTOEC is separate to the Department of Education Tivendale school?---No, it’s part of Department of Education.

But it’s not a part of Tivendale School, and your - - -?---Yes, it can be. If we’ve got young people NTOEC, they can still do that within the classroom.


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

As the principal you could have overseen my client participating in the NTOEC program .....?---That’s what was offered to him.

And you say he said no, he declined that offer?---He ripped up the schoolwork and chucked it out.

Now, you understand there’s an allegation by client, don’t you, that he asked to do his year 10 certificate and you denied him that opportunity?---Yes, I’m aware of that.

And your response to that, as I understand it, is in paragraphs 62 to 64 of your statement. And what I suggest to you is, in fact, you did refuse him that opportunity. Do you agree with that?---Which opportunity?

To do his year 10 certificate?---No, I think I provided you the year 10 – the emails that show that he was actually enrolled.

But that’s not quite my question. What I’m – I’m suggesting something to you?---Sorry.

So I’m suggesting that – sorry, just go back. It’s Friday afternoon, I’ll just go back one second. So he asked you if he could do his year 10 certificate and you refused that request?---That’s incorrect.

Okay. And when he asked you that, not only did you initially say no – sorry, you initially said no, and then you went back to him, and you said that he could do it, but he had to do it by himself in his cell. What do you say about that?---That’s not true. I have absolutely no authority to dictate where he can or can’t.

Sorry, do you want to elaborate on that answer?---Just, I can’t say, “You have to do it in your cell.” I can’t say that. That’s Corrections. That’s where – that’s their – you know, they might say the kitchen, they might say – I can’t say that. I have no jurisdiction to dictate that he has to sit in his cell. That also doesn’t make any sense.

But if he was placed in the BMU, he wouldn’t have been allowed out of his cell?---If he was placed in the BMU, correct.

See, what I’m suggesting to you is you failed in your obligations by not providing him with an adequate alternative to access to education. Do you agree with that?---No, I disagree.

Do you agree with the general principle that if a child is denied their right to education, that that could have a deleterious effect on their mental health?---Absolutely. If a young person desperately wants to, yes.

Okay. Finally, I’d just like to ask you something about document in the supplementary tender bundle, reference DAJ.0031.0010.5245. Sorry, tab 16. If I can just draw your attention to 14 of that document. Do you recognise that document as


5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

a letter you sent as the principal of Tivendale School to NAAJA?---No. I didn’t send that to NAAJA, as far as I know.

Okay. So I just want to ask you some questions in relation to 14. Do you want a moment to just read that paragraph?---Yep.

So when you spoke to the principal psychologist, the psychologist as you’ve reported there said he had raised no mental health concerns?---Yes.


Do you agree it’s possible that he could have had mental health concerns or could have been suffering and not raised it with the psychologist?---Yes, of course, it’s possible.

Is that something that concerned you?---No, not particularly. Dylan was given the opportunity to engage with education, just not to attend school, for a period of about four months, five months.

Thank you, Commissioners, those are my questions.

MR O’BRIEN-HARTCHER: O’Brien-Hartcher.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: O’Brien-Hartcher, yes.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR O’BRIEN-HARTCHER [3.39 pm]

MR O’BRIEN-HARTCHER: Please the Commission, I appear for AG and I have leave to ask this witness some questions.

Ms Coon, I appear for a young lady by pseudonym AG. Do you know - - -?---I do, yes.

Alright. Okay. You did a statement in response to what AG has said and that, as I understand it, has been tendered this morning. Can I take you to annexure LC1 of that statement. It’s an email from Larissa Gadza, and in the second paragraph, third line – fourth line down Larissa says:

I’m aware that AG sometimes gets frustrated and vents this anger, so I have discussed with her that if she recognises this happening she should ask to leave before things escalate.

Is that your recollection of what was said in that email?---Yes. I can see that here.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2761 L.M. COON XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MR O’BRIEN-HARTCHER

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And that would be an appropriate strategy to deal with things before they got out of control. Would that be fair?---Yes. That worked for her, I think.

Good. Okay. And that email was sent on Monday, 28 April 2014; is that right?---That’s the date on the email.

Yes. Okay. Now, the following day, Tuesday, 29 April 2014, there was another email about AG from Larissa Gadza and that’s annexure 26789 to your statement. Do you remember that email?---Yes, I remember the– well, I can’t see - - -

It should appear on the screen in a moment?---Thank you.

I’ll just read that it says:

In the middle session today, AG returned from a visit. She was distracted and did not want to be involved in the class discussions. Jacquie tried to involve her in the class by asking some questions to do with the topic. AG did not engage. She then asked if she could leave, because she was feeling sick, and then she left at 10 past 11.

Do you remember that?---I don’t remember it no, but it’s in front of me.

Okay. I just wanted to ask you a couple of questions about that. The – according to that email, AG had a visit that day. You don’t know the content of that visit, or you don’t remember the content of that visit, do you?---I don’t even remember the email, so I wouldn’t remember the visit.

Okay. So it would be fair to say you don’t know who that visit was with or what they discussed?---No, sorry.

Okay. And you accept that it’s possible that it could have been a very upsetting visit?---Yes. I think that’s probably why – that she mentioned.

And that would be a fair reason for somebody to be distracted. Would that be fair?---Yes.

And when AG left the class, it may well have been part of the strategy that was discussed in the email sent the day before that she should leave before things got out of hand, would that be fair?---Well, this time she said she was sick; she may have been upset. I don’t know and I don’t remember.

Fair enough?---Thank you.

Thank you. I just want to ask you about LC3, which is the third annexure to your statement, and that is a series of emails between you and – sorry, I withdraw that. It is attachments to some emails between you and Cassie Yaxley and Debra Moore, and it’s those – you attach to those emails some certificates of AGs things that she’d done

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2762 L.M. COON XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MR O’BRIEN-HARTCHER

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

at school, accomplishments, where she was up to, that sort of stuff. Would that be fair?---Yes, I think there was only a couple, but her driver’s – learners licence I think. I can’t remember what else.

And you were aware that she has – that AG has said that she had asked for records from Tivendale School, but she never got them. Do you - - -?---Yes, that did seem to be what was suggested.

And these emails show that you’ve, in fact, fulfilled your obligations and sent them on to whoever they were going on to, would that be right?---Yes.

But you’re obviously not in a position to say whether or not they eventually reached AG and she got hold of them, would that be fair?---Yeah, I can’t say. You’re right.

Thank you very much, Commissioners, those are my questions.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes. Thanks, Mr O’Brien-Hartcher.

MR GOODWIN: I think only Mr Tippett left, Commissioner.

MR TIPPETT: I’m always last.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: It’s a good spot to be in on a Friday afternoon, Mr Tippett.

MR TIPPETT: It is indeed and I won’t be in it for very long. Could we turn up on the screen exhibit 307 paragraph 74, please.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Ms Coon, Mr Tippett appears for Mr Middlebrook?---Okay. Thank you.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TIPPETT [3.44 pm]

MR TIPPETT: I do apologise?---That’s okay. Thank you.

I appear for Mr Middlebrook, and I just want to ask you about this last paragraph – not last, really, but paragraph 74 of your first statement. That concerns a telephone conversation between yourself and Mr Middlebrook regarding Mr Voller and his return to school?---Yes.

You see that?---Yes.

Firstly, I just want to ask you a couple of questions about that. It appears, clearly, Mr Middlebrook rang up to advocate on behalf of Mr Voller to return to school?---Yes.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2763 L.M. COON XXN©Commonwealth of Australia MR TIPPETT

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

And can you recall the circumstances that he outlined to you that he thought you should – should cause you to consider your decision?---I’m sorry, I can’t.

reconsider your decision?---I’m sorry, I can’t.

Alright. And are you in a position to tell the Commission the reasons you gave him as to why you declined to reconsider your decision?---I think that the reasons would be that I was concerned about the safety and security of the staff and other kids, and Mr Voller’s continual disruption in school and the need to be – provide an environment that was conducive to the other detainees to learn.

Yes. So this wasn’t just about Mr Voller, it was about a lot of other children who were entitled to an education; is that correct?---Absolutely.

Yes. And Mr Voller was depriving them of that entitlement; is that right?---He did when he was in the classroom.

Yes. No further questions.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you, Mr Tippett. You have some questions.

MS KATHRAKIS: Just a couple of questions, Commissioners.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes. Thank you.

<RE-EXAMINATION BY MS KATHRAKIS [3.46 pm]

MS KATHRAKIS: I’m going to ask you some questions about the rules of the classroom. You’ve been asked a number of questions about that. How is it that the rules of the classroom came to be formulated?---We sat down with the detainees and worked out and talked about and tossed around ideas of what would be fair rules to have in the classroom that would – everyone would be expected to abide by.

And so it was communicated to the kids in that setting – a collaborative - - -?---Yes.

- - - sort of way?---Not all of them. It was done in one classroom.

Right. You’ve also been asked a number of questions about your approach to rules and your consistent approach to levelling out the consequences, if you like. Why is consistency in the application of rules important in your view?---It’s important because they’re there to ensure that everybody gets – you know, has an environment, I think we’ve already talked about how difficult it is having kids – you know, different abilities, different ages. Some of them are co-offenders. So we have the rules there so that everybody is able to engage in the best possible way. And again, consistency is key, because the kids need to know what is expected so that their

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2764 L.M. COON RXN©Commonwealth of Australia MS KATHRAKIS

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

expectations are explicit: this is what is expected, these are the consequences if you don’t follow those. And I think that’s why, or one of the main reasons why, the young people in there are mostly very well behaved.

I’m going to ask you some questions now about the special needs funding that you got for Mr Voller?---Yep.

You obviously went to a lot of effort to obtain that funding for him, and you’ve indicated in your evidence that you did that primarily to get him back into the classroom?---Yes.

Get him engaged?---Yes.

Given the effort that you went to, was it feasible for you to do that with every student or more students?---No. It’s not feasible, particularly if you don’t know you’re going to have them past next Friday, because the process, the paperwork that needs to occur, is quite time consuming and lengthy.

You’ve given evidence in response to questions in the morning session from counsel assisting that you considered resources to be adequate, but the case is, isn’t it, that you still made consistent efforts for additional funding for programs that you were - - -?---Yes.

Trying to obtain?---Yes, and we did. I think once we had a 20 or $30,000 grant that we were able to turn a space into a recording studio. So we were able to get acoustic tiles and flash Apple, sorry, I’m IT ignorant really, flash Apple computers and with the music teacher, the kids were able to record their own songs and things like that, so - - -

In your - - -?---And we had funding to the manual arts area. I can’t remember how much that was for, but we were able to, yeah.

You were also trying initiatives for a beauty salon?---Yes.

Can you expand a little on that?---Yes. I was hoping that if I could provide a space for the young female detainees, one to be used as a reward, but also I was hoping that if I had a beauty salon area, and so therefore I went out, I think, I remember it was Good Friday and they were having a fire sale around here at one of the hairdressing salons and all their equipment and brushes and you know, hair dryers, straighteners, shampoos, things like that, things that you hang hair dryers and things – I didn’t know they existed, but – and I sourced two – I don’t want what to call them, hairdressing chairs and basin set-ups and things like that. My hope was that we could then go to the department and ask for a cert I or II in hair or beauty.

And was this something that you did in response to a request from the girls or how was it that that .....?--- No, it wasn’t ..... well, because – you know, we already had foot spas and nail – you know, detention centres are extremely masculine, and I was

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2765 L.M. COON RXN©Commonwealth of Australia MS KATHRAKIS

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

always aware that the young women – you know, really were in a very masculine space with a lot of male people. And so – you know, we would buy foot spas and things like that, we had 25 different nail polish, nail brushes, we had makeup and they would do those things and really enjoy it. And so the idea went from there: why couldn’t we do it as part of a VET program and also, you know, be upskilled in something that they showed an interest in?

Thank you. Commissioners.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you, Ms Kathrakis. Mr Goodwin.

<RE-EXAMINATION BY MR GOODWIN [3.51 pm]

MR GOODWIN: I have one question in re-examination.

In – during your evidence, you’ve discussed the importance of safety and security in the classroom, particularly in the detention centre setting, and – as well as the optimal staff to student ratio that might exist. I just wanted to ask: do you think that if there was a better staff to student ratio, the type that you witnessed or were told existed in other States and Territories, that that in and of itself would also assist in increasing the safety and security of the classroom simply because there were more hands on deck, to put it simply?---Well, it’s not so much the more hands on deck, but the class size. So just having one teacher and one classroom support officer between – you know, six students, absolutely.

So it’s more of that – that personal interaction itself increases – well, decreases risks to - - -?---Yes, it decreases risks. But it’s also difficult to, you know, we have to think as well about the young person, how they feel. If they can’t read very well, it can be quite humiliating to show that in front of a 10 year old who might read better. So, you know, being in one classroom, having a space where you can actually say to someone, “It’s okay, you know, you can do that here, it’s safe.” Yeah, it’s – it’s just hard. So it’s not necessarily – yes, it’s the ratio but it’s also having that space where you can put people together, young people together based on ability, and create more of a safer environment that’s more conducive to learning. It must be exceptionally hard for them to be 17 and not be able to read and write and have that sitting in class with other young people.

That was my only question.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: I’ve just got a couple of questions for you, Ms Coon, and then you will be on your way?---Thank you.

Early in your evidence you made reference to an organisation that you belong to. I didn’t quite get the name and I wonder if you can repeat it?---It’s the Australian Educators in Juvenile Justice.

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2766 L.M. COON RXN©Commonwealth of Australia MR GOODWIN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Do they have a website?---Yeah, they do. I’m thinking. Gee, my memory’s bad. I can send it to you, if you - - -

You can send it to – you’ve got the contact for the Commission – couldn’t you?---Yeah, I can send that to you.

It would be handy, thank you. It’s – I haven’t been able to find it. I looked and we were unsuccessful?---Well - - -

In the course of – so we would be obliged if you would do that. In the course of – I think you said you have two yearly meetings and you were funded to attend those?---It was, I think, every two years, or – yeah.

Something like that. Did you come to consider whether there were any models for education delivery in juvenile detention settings that were different from the opportunities that you had to do that, and whether there was some other model that might be more effective?---Not necessarily. We seemed to have the same sort of difficulties regardless of the detention centre, but there were some that were very well staffed, and very well quipped and had purpose-built – for example, coffee shops where the young people would learn how to create – baristas and make coffees and the hairdressing salon I talked about, things like that, but they on the whole tended to be – they would have particular areas, so cabins and – you know, four or five young people would live in a supported accommodation, and so there was one in particular I went to WA, but that’s a while ago now. And I was extremely impressed, Commissioner, it was on hectares and hectares of land, and it ranged from a very high security look that looked like a prison, all the way out to houses where they were preparing them for being independent people, and living on their own. So they would have to cook their own meals and do their own washing, and get up and – like in a home environment, but teaching them to be independent.

And what about the education component of .....?---Again, they hit it out of the ballpark. It was quite impressive at the time. They had incredible resources and classroom sizes and they looked great.

Was that at Banksia Hill?---Is that out near the Casuarina prison? I’m going back a while.

I’m not a denizen of Perth, so I can’t - - -?---Yes. I’m sorry. I don’t remember where it was.

Alright. Thank you. Any other features – particularly I’m interested in your views about what you learnt through your association with other juvenile detention educators of what you might describe as innovative or good practice?---Not that I can just recall off the top of my head. I’ve just been impressed with VET in schools. Getting that funding to run VET in detention centres, to me, would be amazing, if that could occur and not just, you know, a little bit here and there, but actually having the workshop there and being able to go there like a job, and learn there every day,

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2767 L.M. COON RXN©Commonwealth of Australia MR GOODWIN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

and those sorts of things, as I said with the hairdressing salon, with a workshop, with a café, real life experience and doing something with purpose and learning.

Thanks very much. Anything arising out of those questions?

MR GOODWIN: No, Commissioners. If this - - -

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Thank you, Ms Coon for your assistance to the Commission. I know it’s been a long day for you and we’re grateful for your cooperation with the Commission in exploring these matters and you’re released from your summons?---Thank you.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [3.58 pm]

MR GOODWIN: Nothing further arising, Commissioners.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: I think you probably get – get the jellybean for finishing at 3 minutes to 4 on a Friday afternoon. All your colleagues will be very pleased.

MR GOODWIN: Yes. I will await my gold star, Commissioners.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: Yes. Very well, then. So what do others in your team say about the starting time on Monday?

MR GOODWIN: I think 9.30, in order to ensure that we get through the witnesses for next week, Commissioners.

COMMISSIONER WHITE: 9.30, then, on Monday. Thank you very much.

MATTER ADJOURNED at 3.58 pm UNTIL MONDAY, 24 APRIL 2017

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2768 ©Commonwealth of Australia

5

10

15

20

25

30

Index of Witness Events

ASHLEY MORTON, AFFIRMED P-2689EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR CALLAGHAN P-2689CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GOODHAND P-2690

THE WITNESS WITHDREW P-2693

BRUCE EVANS, AFFIRMED P-2693EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR CALLAGHAN P-2694CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GOODHAND P-2696CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BROWNHILL P-2700


LISA MARIE COON, AFFIRMED P-2702EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR GOODWIN P-2702CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOULTEN P-2734CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GOODHAND P-2753CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR O’BRIEN-HARTCHER P-2761CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TIPPETT P-2763RE-EXAMINATION BY MS KATHRAKIS P-2764RE-EXAMINATION BY MR GOODWIN P-2766


Index of Exhibits and MFIs


P-2689


P-2689

EXHIBIT #306 STATEMENT OF BRUCE EVANS DATED 31/01/2017

P-2694

EXHIBIT #307 STATEMENT OF LISA COON RESPONSIVE TO EVIDENCE OF DYLAN VOLLER DATED 12/04/2017

P-2702

EXHIBIT #308 STATEMENT OF LISA COON RESPONSIVE TO THE EVIDENCE OF AJ DATED 11/04/2017

P-2702

EXHIBIT #309 EMAIL FROM MR MIDDLEBROOK TO LISA COON

P-2746

EXHIBIT #310 FACEBOOK POSTS BY LISA COON P-2750

.ROYAL COMMISSION 21.4.17 P-2769©Commonwealth of Australia

5

transcript 21 april 2017 web viewso you see there, under the word definitions, ... sight and...

Documents