03 Alan Jones | Complainant J rejects 'financial gain' suggestions

With a suppression order now revoked, we can reveal Complainant J repeatedly denied a financial motive for his sexual assault allegations against Alan Jones. Isobel Roe and Stocky break down all the key lines of questioning in the cross examination so far, and Complainant J's responses. If you have any questions you’d like Isobel and Stocky to answer in future episodes, please email [email protected] mailto:[email protected]. Watch this episode here: The Case Of... & Mushroom Case Daily - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLn2RjxYNpcawm95Te5eEERTTX5EiN-igi Sexual assault support services: MARS Australia (for men affected by rape and sexual abuse) https://marsaustralia.com.au/ on (07) 3857 1222, National Survivors Foundation https://igff.org.au/ on 1300 124 43 The Case Of is the follow-up to the hit podcast Mushroom Case Daily, and all episodes of that show will remain available in the back catalogue of The Case Of.

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Speaker 00

  Hi, I'm Patricia Carvallis, the host of Politics Now. And sometimes it can be hard to cut through all the noise from the Canberra bubble. But on the Politics Now podcast, bursting it wide open is our core business. I'm joined by the brightest minds at the ABC to break down the polly speak and have a chat about what's actually going on behind the scenes. It's called Politics Now and you can find it on ABC Listen. ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news, music and more.

• 0:42Stephen Stockwell?

  For almost two days, complainant Jay has been intensely questioned by Alan Jones's barrister. But we couldn't tell you what was asked and what answers were given until a last minute court decision pulled back the curtain. I'm Stephen Stockwell, this is episode three of the case of Alan Jones.

• 1:01Speaker 02

  Veteran broadcaster Alan Jones has been a giant of the Australian media landscape.

• 1:06Speaker 03

  Some people said that he was more powerful than the Prime Minister.

• 1:10Speaker 04

  There was an 83 year old male arrested this morning. Detectives from the Child Abuse Squad turned up at Alan Jones' luxury apartment down there at Circular Quay.

• 1:19Speaker 02

  Following allegations that he indecently assaulted multiple young men.

• 1:23Speaker 05

  I'm not going to dwell here on the allegations made about me, other than to say that I refute them entirely.

• 1:30Stephen Stockwell?

  The final moments each day in court are often used for a little bit of housekeeping. And yesterday, minutes before we left, a blanket was lifted and a suppression order that had prevented us from discussing almost any of complainant Jay's cross-examination was removed. So here we are with the details of the challenges and the questions that he has faced. There throughout all of this has been ABC Court reporter Isabel Rowe, who can take us through the key details. Welcome Isabel.

• 1:56Speaker 06

  Nice to see you so soon, Stocky.

• 1:58Stephen Stockwell?

  Was not expecting this, but here we are.

• 2:00Speaker 06

  Here we are.

• 2:01Stephen Stockwell?

  With this suppression lifted, can you wrap up the cross-examination of complainant Jay in 60 seconds or so for us?

• 2:08Speaker 06

  Yeah, so all of a sudden, late yesterday, what we thought might happen a little bit later has happened. We can reveal the key details of what has happened in court the last couple of days. And that's been the cross-examination of Jay. Claims that he came forward with his complaint about Alan Jones for financial gain, claims that he doesn't remember some things and claims that he's making some things up entirely. And claims that he changed his timeline and changed what he said in his police statement and what he's now saying in court.

• 2:40Stephen Stockwell?

  Yep, thank you Isabel. I want to get straight to what happened and why there was limitation on this. There had been a suppression in place for the cross-examination of complainant Jay. And that was because the prosecution objected to a line of questioning from Alan Jones's barrister. What questions were they worried about?

• 2:58Speaker 06

  Yeah, so the questioning was around this revelation in court, essentially, that after he was a young athlete, Jay went on to become a police officer. And what we heard in court was that not only was he a police officer, he had to resign from his job because there was a misconduct breach. Something happened and he was, he had to leave essentially. And that was in 2024. And because the prosecution challenged that, there was this suppression order. So the prosecution had concerns when they first heard this line of questioning, that it would go to questions of credibility. And they thought that a lot of this should be inadmissible.

• 3:41Speaker 06

  And so they said, you know, we want this evidence not to be admissible. And the judge said, well, I've got to hear it first. And so basically from that point, everything that was said in the cross-examination was covered by a non-publication order.

• 3:59Stephen Stockwell?

  And this is really interesting, Isabel, the way that this was managed, because in a jury trial, what would happen is that the jury would be sent out of the room, we'd have what's called a void year, where there's this evidence heard without the jury. And the judge then decides, oh yeah, is this or is this not admissible? But because there's no jury, the judge still has to hear this to make that decision, which is why all of this ended up under a cloud.

• 4:19Speaker 06

  Yeah, so the judge said, I've got to understand what it is that I'm going to have to rule admissible or not. So therefore I'm going to have to hear it. And then the crown said, well, okay, but the media's here. And they're going to report all of this. And then what if you rule it inadmissible? And then it's all out there. And the judge said, well, fair enough. And so he said, all right, no one's reporting anything, blanket non-publication order. We're all like, oh. So we have been writing all this stuff for two days, knowing at some point it would be allowed, probably, but we just weren't sure when.

• 4:59Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah, the wording of this non-publication order, interim non-publication order, to be more specific, was broad enough that, yeah, as you say, no one's reported any of the cross-examination. I actually think the most detail of the cross-examination was in our last episode, where we talked about the exchange around Jay's sporting achievements and the congratulations from his honour. So I think that's the most information anybody had before this was lifted yesterday afternoon. What changed yesterday afternoon that meant that we can now talk about this?

• 5:28Speaker 06

  So the prosecution basically said, never mind. They, they, they said, we've heard it all now. And actually, what we were concerned about and where we thought this line of questioning was going, didn't go there. And if the defence is not going to ask any more questions about his time as a police officer, then actually we don't press our objection, we don't have any issues with admissibility. And the defence said, sure. And then the judge said, all right, well, have at it then. Then the non-publication order is lifted and yeah, all of a sudden we could report all of this content.

• 6:07Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah, the shocked faces of the journalists in that room at that moment, I will remember for a little while. Isabel, when the defence was asking Jay about this resignation, where were they going if they weren't going to this credibility?

• 6:23Speaker 06

  What they wanted to do was essentially, you know, paint him as someone who was seeking financial gain. So the court heard that he lost his job. He was living with his mother, he was still to pay child support. And he was someone who was no longer getting money from Alan Jones, as we heard the payments ended in 202012, those alleged $400, $500, $600 payments. And the defence said, well, you saw Alan Jones being arrested in 2024 and you wanted to get something from it.

• 7:04Speaker 06

  And he was very strong in his denials. He was really pushed on that. You know, Gabriel Bashir said, did you see an opportunity there for something life-changing to happen to you? Isn't it the case that you did see bringing such an allegation as an opportunity to ultimately get paid money to you by Mr. Jones? And complainant Jay said, no, I, I don't see that. He said he didn't think he could get money because there was no, he thought that too much time had passed to receive compensation. And Gabriel Bashir said, sort of, well, you, you, so you could, you know, you know that you could. Have you, have you looked it up? And he said, no, I haven't looked it up. But, you know, maybe I know that from my time as a police officer.

• 7:48Speaker 06

  I don't think I can get money. I don't want money. He was very clear, you know, if, is there something his honour can do to write on a form to say, I won't accept anything? He was very adamant that he didn't want anything and he didn't want people to think that he, he came forward for that reason.

• 8:05Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah, really strong repeated denials when that line of questioning came up from Gabriel Bashir, Alan Jones's barrister, because this did come up several times, you know, it came up the, this sort of first instance. And then again, I think around messages to his ex-girlfriend?

• 8:21Speaker 06

  Hmm, yeah, so he was asked several times whether he'd spoken to his ex-girlfriend in more recent years about what had happened to him. Because we heard that he had told her when, like quite recently after the allegations occurred, he said to her, Alan Jones is touching me. He was asked multiple times, you know, had you spoken to her since about the allegations? And he said, no, he hadn't. He said, You know, he was asked several times, you know, what conversations have you had with her? Have you talked to her about the allegations? And he said, no. And then Gabriel Bashir produced a list of, or a document showing his Facebook messages with her.

• 9:05Speaker 06

  And the messages said that he promises to look after her when this is all over. And he said, I don't really recall the context of that. And she said, are you sure you're not saying you've promised to look after her financially? And he said, no, you know, I can't have looked after her financially. That's not what I meant. It was because we were having, you know, discussions about other things. We always looked after each other. We were friends.

• 9:31Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah, we had, again, yeah, those kind of strong repeated denials and, you know, quite impassioned as well. As you mentioned, Isabel, this kind of almost a plea to Judge Glenn Walsh saying, hey, look, is there anything you can sign? Is there any order you can give that says I don't want any money? At one point, I remember him saying, I remember Jay saying, you know, Alan Jones has worked hard for his money. He's built, he's built this, but he's got, he doesn't want any of that. That's not what he's in court for. He's there because, you know, he wants justice, basically. That's what he's saying. Isabel, the defence also took Complain at Jay to the payments from Alan Jones. Now, we spoke about them in our first episode. These are weekly payments that Alan Jones was allegedly making to Complain at Jay.

• 10:11Stephen Stockwell?

  And when we were, when Complain at Jay was giving his evidence in chief, you know, that was sort of laid out, the timing of the increases in them. Often with allegations, often after allegations that Jay had made or incidences of alleged, alleged assaults that Jay says he experienced. Now, in the defence cross-examination of him, they have realigned those payments. They're saying they line up with athletic achievements, not the alleged assaults.

• 10:39Speaker 06

  Yeah, so they essentially have produced his bank statements. And they've produced his achievements in certain points of his career. And they've said, you know, when you got more money from $400 to $500, that lined up with a particular sporting achievement. What Jay had told the court was that he was on a trip back from Canberra and he alleges Alan Jones said to him, you've been a good boy. I'll give you more money. And it was another hundred dollars. And Gabriel Bashir said, no, you know, that actually aligns with this particular, you know, thing that you did in your career.

• 11:21Speaker 06

  Then there was an increase again to $600. And what his bank statements supposedly show is that he had about 23 cents in his bank account at one point. And he missed a rent payment. And then there was an increase to $600 and he was able to pay his rent. And Gabriel Bashir said, well, maybe the increase was because Alan Jones was helping you with your finances and you were happy to accept that. And he, he said, you know, yes, Alan Jones was helping me essentially when you, when it comes down to it with my living expenses. But he said, you know, I didn't miss rent payments.

• 12:03Speaker 06

  I always tried to put money aside for the things that I needed. And he insists that Alan Jones increased payments by telling him he'd been a good boy and that he deserved more money.

• 12:15Stephen Stockwell?

  Yep. Complain at Jay did acknowledge that the reason for the payments was to support his sporting career. That was the, thought Alan Jones told him when he first offered these payments to him. So he could, didn't have to work, so he could focus on his, his sporting career as well. I do remember in court, Isabel, when that, you know, 23 cents came up in the bank account statement, someone kind of gasping in the room as that was like, you know, a small amount of money. And I thought back to my days as a university student and thought, that's not an unfamiliar amount of money to.

• 12:46Speaker 06

  That's huge.

• 12:46Stephen Stockwell?

  That's like, you know, that's, that's enough, you know, they get you through the, the night until, you know, the centlink payment drops in. And, you know, give a, buy a loaf of bread and some vegemite to survive for the following week. Throughout all of this, Isabel, Complain at Jay has been taken to lots of different documents. He's in a different room appearing via video link. And I remember actually on the first day, the cross-examination started, there was a point where Gabriel Bashir said, oh, can we take, can we take the, the witness to packet F or something like that? What is happening in, in this moment, in these moments here?

• 13:20Speaker 06

  It, it's this tactic that the defence is using, and it's obviously a common tactic in, in cross-examination, is you ask the witness to recall something, you ask what they've told the police in the statement, you ask them what they've said in court. You ask them what they said the day before in the evidence in chief. Do you remember that answer? Yes. You know, and, and push them on a certain point and get them to sort of say what they remember. And then they sort of come out with a document and say, but this document says this. And so often there would be bank statements or like a Telstra record, we heard, which showed that what Jay remembered as happening on a specific date appears to actually have happened on a different date.

• 14:05Speaker 06

  And, you know, Jay was happy in a few circumstances to say, well, look, well, perhaps I, I was wrong, you know, perhaps I didn't remember it. He swore he remembered, for example, getting his licence on his 17th birthday. But then the bank statement showed he'd paid his licence fee on a different day. And he said, well, perhaps that's true, you know, I've got to accept what it says on the documents. And so the, the defence is trying to pick apart his own recollection of, of what's happened.

• 14:33Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah, and this kind of process from Gabriel Bashir has kind of realigned the timeline on a few things and the way that we had been talking about this from what's been presented in court. Because, you know, for example, while we heard that Jay initially thought that he had got the, the phone from Alan Jones, which was given to him as a gift from Alan Jones while he was at school, it now looks like he was older than that.

• 14:55Speaker 06

  Yeah, so this was quite interesting. I mean, he, he had told us initially, he got the phone when he was 17 and it was his first mobile phone. And that was how, he said Alan Jones contacted him because previously he'd contact, been contacted through his coach or through his school. What the documents showed, the Telstra records, was that the phone was connected after he was 18. And so Jay sort of admits that, well, perhaps his memory is not quite accurate. And in the questioning, Gabriel Bashir said, you know, were you trying to frame this as Alan Jones giving a schoolboy a phone? And he said, you know, no, no, I wasn't.

• 15:37Speaker 06

  And he admitted that, you know, perhaps his memory wasn't right on that one.

• 15:41Stephen Stockwell?

  Hmm, yeah. And Isabel, Gabriel Bashir has also questioned Jay about his size, his, his physicality.

• 15:49Speaker 06

  Yeah, it's, it's been a line of questioning that they have pushed throughout this, that, you know, Jay was an athlete. He was young and fit. And she said, you were physically superior to Alan Jones. And he was sort of like, what do you mean? And she said, well, you're an athlete, weren't you? You know, you have to be strong. You were physically superior. And he sort of said, yeah, I guess so. And she said, you know, you were driving the car when these alleged incidents happened. You were, you know, had the brake under your foot. You're the keys to the car. Why did you never stop the car? She said, why did you never push his hand away? You ever, you know, push him away? Why did you ever just, why didn't you ever say something? And he said at every time, you know, I, no, I, I never did any of those things.

• 16:33Speaker 06

  And, you know, he's previously spoken about this issue of, of Alan Jones being a powerful man. You know, he said at one point, he was driving and this, you know, Alan Jones allegedly touched him. And he said, I, I had the most powerful man in the country in my car. I just kept driving, you know, he's, he's brought up previously this issue of not feeling like he could say something to Alan Jones. He was getting something in the form of money from Alan Jones. And that was just their relationship. That was how it worked.

• 17:04Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah, yeah. When we were hearing about that, kind of that challenge, that physicality challenge, also having the keys to the car, Gabriel Bashir asking, why didn't you just take the car? He said, I'm not going to steal this Mercedes, was Complain at Jay's response in that moment. And then Gabriel Bashir challenged him further and said, well, you, you know, say you were assaulted in the car and then you go and get in a buggy with Alan Jones and you take a tour around his property. And Complain at Jay said, well, I didn't want to be in that buggy either. So that was that line of questioning. Something we talked about, Isabel, when Complain at Jay was giving evidence, I think this was in our first episode, was the, the way that he had kind of replayed memories, you know, closing his eyes, apologising to the court, saying, look, it really just helps if I go back into this moment.

• 17:48Stephen Stockwell?

  And this was kind of seized on by the defence. What does Gabriel Bashir say that he's doing in those moments?

• 17:54Speaker 06

  Well, she says he's making it up. And she also says that he is trying to remember what he's previously said, rather than trying to remember what actually happened. So he, yeah, he's, he's done it a lot in cross-examination. He sort of, he closes his eyes, you know, quite forcefully. He, he says, excuse me a few moments, I'm just going to take time. And he's saying he's trying to place himself back in the moment that it happened so that he can get his best recollection. He says that, you know, if he's looking at people moving around, he gets distracted. But Gabriel Bashir is essentially saying, accusing him of, of actually trying to remember what he said yesterday. And a few times she's used, she's accused him of using very similar words to the day before

• 18:38Speaker 06

  and therefore he's remembered a script. And, you know, he's obviously been totally in denial of that. He says, that's not the case. You know, I'm, I'm just trying to remember exactly what's happened. And in few, few moments, he has said, look, you know, perhaps I've recollected that wrong. Or he's confused sort of some little facts in one alleged incident with another little fact, another alleged incident. But he's, he's insistent that the incidents happened. And that, you know, perhaps it's, it's been, you know, more than 20 years, so it's been a while.

• 19:12Stephen Stockwell?

  Hmm, yeah, there's this line of questioning kind of on, I mean, where Gabriel Bashir has gone with a lot of this is this idea that, oh, you know, the question she's actually asked is, oh, was that a false memory? And, you know, he, Witness Jay has kind of counted that and saying, no, this is what, this is what I believe has happened in these situations. This is my memory of this. But throughout this, his honour, just Judge Glenn Walsh, has actually jumped in a couple of points, points. One point in particular during a line of questioning, saying that it looks like the defence is kind of trying to have it two ways.

• 19:40Speaker 06

  Hmm, he was basically trying to say that, that the defence was trying to either say he had a false memory, but also saying that he, it didn't happen at all. And he said that they, the defence can't say that he's wrong about the thing happening and also try and see whether he'll admit that the thing never happened, that you can't have both. But essentially, Gabriel Bashir argued, no, no, I, I am trying to, you know, press both. I'm, I can test him on both of those things and. I think they eventually worked it out. Yeah.

• 20:16Stephen Stockwell?

  Yeah. Yeah. The, uh, the questioning I have no doubt will continue through this. Uh, Isabel, I really appreciate the effort coming in, turning around this episode, uh, so quickly. Um, you know, yesterday afternoon was really, you don't see a lot of chaos around a court, you know, usually around a verdict. That's when things really start to, um, to, to pick up steam. But yeah, that moment yesterday afternoon, when this was lifted very kind of suddenly at the end of the day, unexpectedly halfway through the cross-examination. Um, and I was leaving and there were, there was a row of reporters standing up against a desk on the phone to an editor somewhere saying, this has just happened. What do we do? Um, a real kind of shock in the afternoon that we weren't expecting.

• 20:54Speaker 06

  Honestly, we were not expecting it only because we were told that this decision about whether or not this evidence was admissible and therefore reportable would happen at the end of the cross-examination. And we were assured that the cross-examination wasn't finished and it is not finished. So we were all sort of thinking we'd have a leisurely four P M. Finish and wander off to the pub. But, uh, alas, I sent an email to the chief of staff, to the whole of the newsroom, basically with the subject line, red alert. The Jones NPO has been lifted. And so we went from having nothing in the evening news to having the lead story in the evening news.

• 21:29Stephen Stockwell?

  Speaking of, uh, frantic messages to, uh, to colleagues, uh, Dylan Bean, who is our video producer, was, uh, asking if he could pack down the room that we've been working in, uh, in Sydney. And, you know, when we heard that the cross-examination would continue to Friday, I was like, oh, yeah, no, that's all good. We're, we're all done. You can, you can wrap that up. And, uh, about two minutes later, there was a all caps, wait exclamation mark, exclamation mark, exclamation mark.

• 21:50Speaker 06

  These things never happen when you want them to happen.

• 21:52Stephen Stockwell?

  No, they don't. Um, speaking of things that we do want to happen though, questions being sent to the case of at abc.net.au.

• 21:58Speaker 06

  Questions.

• 21:59Stephen Stockwell?

  We are getting so many through there at the moment. Uh, we'll save most of them to our episode on, uh, Tuesday next week. But what I do want to get to, uh, we have started a discussion about the use of paper in courts, Isabel, that I was not expecting we would get to. Uh, the piles in the courtroom, uh, in Sydney are growing and growing. And, uh, Emma has been in touch to let us know that paperless trials are actually a possibility in New South Wales. There was a trial at the end of last year in the Industrial Relations Commission, uh, where they went paperless for that. It saved forty nine lever arch folders of paper. There's those big, you know.

• 22:30Speaker 06

  Oh, yeah. I know. Yeah. My number ones.

• 22:32Stephen Stockwell?

  Which is the equivalent to four hundred thousand pages of paper, uh, when they went paperless for this. This was, I think, I think it was a six week trial that they were, they were working on through this. Um, it saved, being paperless, almost four days of hearing time because they didn't need to rifle through paper to give it to different witnesses at different times. Um, and during my, uh, my checking of Emma's email, not that I don't trust you, but I did want to make sure that this was a real thing. I, uh, I also stumbled across a little note from the, um, New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission, uh, on how to conduct paperless trials. It was published just two days ago. So

• 23:02Speaker 06

  Wow.

• 23:03Stephen Stockwell?

  They're, they're happening, they're real, and they exist in at least New South Wales.

• 23:06Speaker 06

  That is incredible.

• 23:07Stephen Stockwell?

  Very much appreciating the emails that are being sent through to the case of at abc dot A U. There's some really interesting ones that have come through that I've been looking at in the inbox that I've filed away for our episode on Tuesday.

• 23:18Speaker 06

  Awesome.

• 23:18Stephen Stockwell?

  Uh, where are we off to next in the trial though?

• 23:20Speaker 06

  We are still hearing from, uh, Complainer J, the cross-examination of Complainer J. Um, that will happen today, Friday, and then, um, we're not sitting on Monday. And then next week, potentially, I think Complainer J is meant to be finished. Uh, and we'll hear from some, from some more witnesses.

• 23:41Stephen Stockwell?

  Right. Thank you, Isabel. Appreciate you joining us for the case of taking us through all of the evidence and, you know, being around to, uh, jump on for a special episode when, uh, a surprise NPO lift occurs late in the day. We'll be back in your feed on Tuesday next week. Make sure you get around ABC Listen, uh, best place to listen to the case of. Our episodes appear there slightly before they appear anywhere else. And also from next week, uh, you'll be able to watch videos in that app as well. So be able to see, uh, Isabel and my beautiful faces, uh, gracing your little nightmare cube screen. Um, if you want to follow on a different podcast app, you can, uh, rate and review us there as well. It makes it much easier for other people to find us. Uh, tell your friends, tell your family, all those things. We'll be back in your feed very soon.

• 24:28Stephen Stockwell?

  The case of Alan Jones is produced by ABC Audio Studios and ABC News. This episode was reported by Isabel Rowe, presented by me, Stephen Stockwell. Our supervising producer is Greg Muller and our executive producer is Claire Rollinson. Thank you to video producer Dylan Bean, who is producing the video versions of these episodes. You can find them on YouTube and soon on ABC Listen. Also to senior lawyer Jasmine Sims for our legal advice to the Sydney newsroom. And also to Audio Studios manager, Eric George. This episode was produced on the land of the Gadigal and we're on tree people.